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

This is the last season of ranked for me, until something changes.

62 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

Beta Tester
354 posts
13,859 battles

Regardless of how this season turns out for me, I'm never doing ranked again under this current scoring model.  

 

If I get to rank 1 this season, I get my Flint.  I'm just saying that so you know where I sit on this.

 

I play DDs almost exclusively.  

 

And this season has taken last season's festival of dog[exp. deleted] play and made it worse.  I didn't think it was possible, but this scoring model just encourages the most horrendously bad play I've ever seen.  

 

I can play my [edited]off in a game, score three caps and two DD kills, and I STILL get a loss - worse still, I STILL lose my star because some [exp. deleted] in a Kutuzov or perhaps an Amagi sat in back and just farmed fire damage the whole game - and the scoring model discounts caps and spotting, ranking them under damage done.  So we get teams of damage farmers screaming about "spot spot spot", and when the DDs dumb enough to listen go in and try to do it, they get hung out to dry, because said campers are too far away to support against a DD effectively.  Anyone in a DD who doesn't play the game of their life, regardless, isn't keeping a star on a loss - because there's no f'ing way to out-damage a farmer unless you get insanely lucky with a torp strike (and in high-level ranked, it is insanely lucky to manage a big strike).  

 

Well, Wargaming - here's a great big "Go [exp. deleted] yourself."  It's you guys that are responsible for this [exp. deleted] playstyle.  You've actively made it worse by giving out detection gear to every battleship (planes, hydro) and senselessly punishing secondaries to the battleships (which should come as no surprise, the top two battleships in ranked, go figure).  

 

I've never actively recommended against this game to people, but I think that it might be time to start, unless the scoring model changes - a LOT.   

 

I can hear someone now "Don't [edited] unless you've got a suggestion" - well, okay: 

Winning team:  top five players get a star only if they score over 1,000 base xp.  Bottom two gain no star.  Bottom two lose a star if they score under 600.  

Losing team:  top two players get a star only if they score over 750xp (or thereabouts).  #3 loses no star, if score is 750+.  Bottom four lose a star.  

 

XP corrections:  

Capping should count as it is now for the initial cap - and should tick 0.25% of its value for every second the cap is held for the player(s) who capped.  So after 6.66 minutes of holding a cap, the initial capping team members should have accumulated the equivalent of another cap's worth of xps.  If they only "helped" the cap, they should get the % award of this value as is appropriate for the "help".  It's a risky move to take a cap, and this rewards players who can pull it off.  

 

Spotting:

It's pretty damned rare for a ship to actually be in position to "spot" for another at this stage, particularly if the target has fired its guns.  Instead of current mechanic, 'spotting' damage should be awarded to the ship closest to the target to the tune of 30% of the "damage done" equivalent when the shots are fired - meaning when someone gets credited with damage against a target, if the target is still visible edit: was visible at the time of firing to anyone on the team, the closest friendly at the time of firing gets 30% of the value.  It also means the person awarded the damage gains only 80% of the value. This is an appropriate reward for risking more than the rest of the team.

 

Of course, some tweaking to these suggestions would be necessary, I'm only tossing these out as points to consider.  

 

But something must change here.  This has become a travesty.  Ranked isn't about winning, it's about shielding your star by farming and then relying on your team to carry you up in wins.  What you've created here encourages the absolute worst sort of play.

 

  Az

  • Cool 19
  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
803 posts
4,376 battles

The star system is only because WG cannot implement a more accurate points-based system. 

A points-based system would not be accurate because there is no working way to measure points based on completing objectives in this game as is.

The current scoring was for a random scenario, itself based off of the progression model. This progression model does not, in any place or form, have intentions of factoring "skill" or "contribution" into account, only grind.

And so we come a full loop. Ranked is about grind. Grind grind grind and maybe eventually you'll become rank 1. 

Unless you find some particular method of performing, and do it in 100 games or less. Bit of luck involved too in that case.

 

So no ranked isn't about winning, it's about grinding. The whole game is about grinding. Not fun, not skill. If you want to change that you'll have to look at much deeper things than "lost a star if score 599 exp" "because was sent off to the far cap where there was nobody to kill".

 

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
215 posts

Didn't WG say that ranked rewards aren't gonna be based on Rank1 in the future but on stars collected? So there wont be much difference if you got to rank 2 or rank 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[UNICS]
Players
3,379 posts
13,554 battles
1 hour ago, KarmaQU_EU said:

So no ranked isn't about winning, it's about grinding. The whole game is about grinding. Not fun, not skill. If you want to change that you'll have to look at much deeper things than "lost a star if score 599 exp" "because was sent off to the far cap where there was nobody to kill".

Why no fun, no skill..? It's a grind for all who doesn't enjoy the game. A good player ranks out in under 100 games, if you're unlucky or has the wrong ships, maybe some more. If you're average you're in for a longer grind and if you're bad you can keep at it for a very long time before reaching rank 1. If you're not up for it, don't play ranked. I get the frustration of the OP, but maybe he just could call it for this season if the tier was wrong or it doesn't work out. Ranked is very skill dependent and maybe people need to reevaluate their own view on their skills..

  • Cool 2
  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[TIPC]
Players
409 posts
17,917 battles

a very simple suggestion from me:set a limit number of battles for a player in a rank season...lets say 200 battles if u worth it u can reach rank 1

the players that play 300+battles to have rank 1 are the problem y rank seasons are not enjoyable mode

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[HEAT]
Players
1,118 posts
32,606 battles

Likely this will be my last ranked season as well. I will get my Flint and quit this painful ranked sh!t.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[TAW]
Players
57 posts
21,148 battles
35 minutes ago, loppantorkel said:

 Ranked is very skill dependent and maybe people need to reevaluate their own view on their skills..

 

Take the win rate % distribution and argue normal distribution. You have your answer right there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[WG-EU]
[WG-EU]
WG Staff, Alpha Tester
2,682 posts
2,615 battles
2 hours ago, Azrael_Ashemdion said:

Regardless of how this season turns out for me, I'm never doing ranked again under this current scoring model.  

 

If I get to rank 1 this season, I get my Flint.  I'm just saying that so you know where I sit on this.

 

I play DDs almost exclusively.  

 

And this season has taken last season's festival of dog[exp. deleted] play and made it worse.  I didn't think it was possible, but this scoring model just encourages the most horrendously bad play I've ever seen.  

 

I can play my [edited]off in a game, score three caps and two DD kills, and I STILL get a loss - worse still, I STILL lose my star because some [exp. deleted] in a Kutuzov or perhaps an Amagi sat in back and just farmed fire damage the whole game - and the scoring model discounts caps and spotting, ranking them under damage done.  So we get teams of damage farmers screaming about "spot spot spot", and when the DDs dumb enough to listen go in and try to do it, they get hung out to dry, because said campers are too far away to support against a DD effectively.  Anyone in a DD who doesn't play the game of their life, regardless, isn't keeping a star on a loss - because there's no f'ing way to out-damage a farmer unless you get insanely lucky with a torp strike (and in high-level ranked, it is insanely lucky to manage a big strike).  

 

Well, Wargaming - here's a great big "Go [exp. deleted] yourself."  It's you guys that are responsible for this [exp. deleted] playstyle.  You've actively made it worse by giving out detection gear to every battleship (planes, hydro) and senselessly punishing secondaries to the battleships (which should come as no surprise, the top two battleships in ranked, go figure).  

 

I've never actively recommended against this game to people, but I think that it might be time to start, unless the scoring model changes - a LOT.   

 

I can hear someone now "Don't [edited] unless you've got a suggestion" - well, okay: 

Winning team:  top five players get a star only if they score over 1,000 base xp.  Bottom two gain no star.  Bottom two lose a star if they score under 600.  

Losing team:  top two players get a star only if they score over 750xp (or thereabouts).  #3 loses no star, if score is 750+.  Bottom four lose a star.  

 

XP corrections:  

Capping should count as it is now for the initial cap - and should tick 0.25% of its value for every second the cap is held for the player(s) who capped.  So after 6.66 minutes of holding a cap, the initial capping team members should have accumulated the equivalent of another cap's worth of xps.  If they only "helped" the cap, they should get the % award of this value as is appropriate for the "help".  It's a risky move to take a cap, and this rewards players who can pull it off.  

 

Spotting:

It's pretty damned rare for a ship to actually be in position to "spot" for another at this stage, particularly if the target has fired its guns.  Instead of current mechanic, 'spotting' damage should be awarded to the ship closest to the target to the tune of 30% of the "damage done" equivalent when the shots are fired - meaning when someone gets credited with damage against a target, if the target is still visible edit: was visible at the time of firing to anyone on the team, the closest friendly at the time of firing gets 20% of the value.  It also means the person awarded the damage gains only 80% of the value. This is an appropriate reward for risking more than the rest of the team.

 

Of course, some tweaking to these suggestions would be necessary, I'm only tossing these out as points to consider.  

 

But something must change here.  This has become a travesty.  Ranked isn't about winning, it's about shielding your star by farming and then relying on your team to carry you up in wins.  What you've created here encourages the absolute worst sort of play.

 

  Az

 

This is actually good and valid feedback that you could have delivered without [exp. deleted] cursing so much.

 

I think we have shown that we are not afraid to make changes to our game modes, maybe the star system is something we can look at for the next iteration. The tricky part is making it work within the current scoring mechanics in a way that is fair and clear and easy to understand for the average player.

  • Cool 8

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[TAW]
Players
57 posts
21,148 battles

What comes to ranked season 8, I have a bit of a gut feeling that save-a-star tactics was not that effective this season. I got the impression having a gold ship resulted in less cases losing a star as a losing team, but this can't be verified because of no statistics.

Its an entertainment business after all, so if you spend money, why not get the worth of your money? Rest of the players are just free content from the perspective of the company.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[NWP]
[NWP]
Players
8,241 posts
11,737 battles
2 hours ago, Azrael_Ashemdion said:

Regardless of how this season turns out for me, I'm never doing ranked again under this current scoring model.  

 

If I get to rank 1 this season, I get my Flint.  I'm just saying that so you know where I sit on this.

 

I play DDs almost exclusively.  

 

And this season has taken last season's festival of dog[exp. deleted] play and made it worse.  I didn't think it was possible, but this scoring model just encourages the most horrendously bad play I've ever seen.  

 

I can play my [edited]off in a game, score three caps and two DD kills, and I STILL get a loss - worse still, I STILL lose my star because some [exp. deleted] in a Kutuzov or perhaps an Amagi sat in back and just farmed fire damage the whole game - and the scoring model discounts caps and spotting, ranking them under damage done.  So we get teams of damage farmers screaming about "spot spot spot", and when the DDs dumb enough to listen go in and try to do it, they get hung out to dry, because said campers are too far away to support against a DD effectively.  Anyone in a DD who doesn't play the game of their life, regardless, isn't keeping a star on a loss - because there's no f'ing way to out-damage a farmer unless you get insanely lucky with a torp strike (and in high-level ranked, it is insanely lucky to manage a big strike).  

 

Well, Wargaming - here's a great big "Go [exp. deleted] yourself."  It's you guys that are responsible for this [exp. deleted] playstyle.  You've actively made it worse by giving out detection gear to every battleship (planes, hydro) and senselessly punishing secondaries to the battleships (which should come as no surprise, the top two battleships in ranked, go figure).  

 

I've never actively recommended against this game to people, but I think that it might be time to start, unless the scoring model changes - a LOT.   

 

I can hear someone now "Don't [edited] unless you've got a suggestion" - well, okay: 

Winning team:  top five players get a star only if they score over 1,000 base xp.  Bottom two gain no star.  Bottom two lose a star if they score under 600.  

Losing team:  top two players get a star only if they score over 750xp (or thereabouts).  #3 loses no star, if score is 750+.  Bottom four lose a star.  

 

XP corrections:  

Capping should count as it is now for the initial cap - and should tick 0.25% of its value for every second the cap is held for the player(s) who capped.  So after 6.66 minutes of holding a cap, the initial capping team members should have accumulated the equivalent of another cap's worth of xps.  If they only "helped" the cap, they should get the % award of this value as is appropriate for the "help".  It's a risky move to take a cap, and this rewards players who can pull it off.  

 

Spotting:

It's pretty damned rare for a ship to actually be in position to "spot" for another at this stage, particularly if the target has fired its guns.  Instead of current mechanic, 'spotting' damage should be awarded to the ship closest to the target to the tune of 30% of the "damage done" equivalent when the shots are fired - meaning when someone gets credited with damage against a target, if the target is still visible edit: was visible at the time of firing to anyone on the team, the closest friendly at the time of firing gets 20% of the value.  It also means the person awarded the damage gains only 80% of the value. This is an appropriate reward for risking more than the rest of the team.

 

Of course, some tweaking to these suggestions would be necessary, I'm only tossing these out as points to consider.  

 

But something must change here.  This has become a travesty.  Ranked isn't about winning, it's about shielding your star by farming and then relying on your team to carry you up in wins.  What you've created here encourages the absolute worst sort of play.

 

  Az

 

The spotter DD is probably one of the most if not the most important roles in Ranked.

 

It's often thankless and "good" spotter DD games usually result in you finishing bottom of the XP pile even though you made it all happen.

 

But for me this role takes out a lot of the randomness out of Ranked as I can consistently progress. It's about playing safe but still being close enough to spot.

 

I may play once more for a Black next season but I'm coming to the end of my Ranked "career" as I don't think I get much from play it other than a lot of time wasted.

 

Also WG your rewards are pathetic, the average PT reward is better than Ranked ones. :Smile_sceptic:

 

 

  • Cool 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[TIPC]
Players
409 posts
17,917 battles
20 minutes ago, MrConway said:

 

This is actually good and valid feedback that you could have delivered without [exp. deleted] cursing so much.

 

I think we have shown that we are not afraid to make changes to our game modes, maybe the star system is something we can look at for the next iteration. The tricky part is making it work within the current scoring mechanics in a way that is fair and clear and easy to understand for the average player.

another idea to be considered i think is as i said above..set a limit number of battles that a player can play in a rank season..i want say any number developers better to figure it out,,,but i hope for a logical number not 500 battles per rank season for example

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
354 posts
13,859 battles
34 minutes ago, MrConway said:

 

This is actually good and valid feedback that you could have delivered without [exp. deleted] cursing so much.

 

Thanks for the feedback - let's just say this season is putting me well into the role-playing mindset, this game makes me swear like a sailor.  

 

  Az

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[POP]
Players
396 posts
8,807 battles
1 hour ago, MrConway said:

. The tricky part is making it work within the current scoring mechanics in a way that is fair and clear and easy to understand for the average player.

 

Revert cap XP nerf. That way you'll reward OP for his job. Also it would discourage back camping damage farming BB/cruisers.

 

A lot of current problems would be solved.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
641 posts
4,774 battles
2 hours ago, MrConway said:

 

This is actually good and valid feedback that you could have delivered without [exp. deleted] cursing so much.

 

I think we have shown that we are not afraid to make changes to our game modes, maybe the star system is something we can look at for the next iteration. The tricky part is making it work within the current scoring mechanics in a way that is fair and clear and easy to understand for the average player.

That's true. But the problem lies within that the average player will probably never achieve maximum rank in a season, and the said average players that actually get very high in the ranks are carried by their team with no actual input behind them.

 

The rank system needs way more levels, you can't squeeze the entire wows population sorted by skill level  in 50 stars. The "safe fall" ranks are a pain for us that works hard to get high up in the system, only to see a pretty average player come to a rank he/she isn't suited for.

I don't think I can count the number of times a DD on my team, has absolutly no clue what what to do in the DD class just charge in the capture point and hopes for the best. And eating a torpedo in the face 1minute after, in his/her Lo-yang.

 

And this is in rank 2-5, the same things you would normally see in ranks like 20-15.

 

Also, please ban premium ships in ranked seasons. You do more harm than good. *Cough* Belfast, Loyang, Kidd *cough*

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
4,011 posts
15,485 battles
4 hours ago, loppantorkel said:

Why no fun, no skill..? It's a grind for all who doesn't enjoy the game. A good player ranks out in under 100 games, if you're unlucky or has the wrong ships, maybe some more. If you're average you're in for a longer grind and if you're bad you can keep at it for a very long time before reaching rank 1. If you're not up for it, don't play ranked. I get the frustration of the OP, but maybe he just could call it for this season if the tier was wrong or it doesn't work out. Ranked is very skill dependent and maybe people need to reevaluate their own view on their skills..

 

You forgot the: If You get potato teams, you're in for a grindfest.

  • Cool 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[BAD-A]
[BAD-A]
Beta Tester
1,761 posts
16,579 battles

My Feedback on this is thus....

Day one take DD ... game 1 ...do the whole spotting thing to watch 'Heavies' head in the opposite direction to ANY caps and camp the blue line.... by heavies I mean anything that wasn't a DD

Take a carrier, spot caps spot ships to watch 'heavies' hide behind islands and refuse to move...

Try a North Carolina..... 3xDD 4 x BB to watch (while typing frantically) all 3 DD go to Southern cap on Mountain Range and proceed to camp there... leaving 4 Battleships to push up with zero screening.. with inevitable results....

Rage Quit after 3 or 4 games.....

 

Day 2.... rinse and repeat for 3 games..... bail out and go back to 'enjoying' Randoms.... Now I never EVER thought that I would find a compelling reason to prefer Randoms to Ranked but this season is the one... I for one won't be bothering with any more ranked until there is some form of entry requirement to make Ranked actually MEAN something....

 

Just for the record I have come across several players in Randoms, playing Flint... who patently have no idea how to use it and really should not be owning it..... says it all that they are ably,  failing to rank 1....

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
185 posts
3,446 battles
6 hours ago, Azrael_Ashemdion said:

Regardless of how this season turns out for me, I'm never doing ranked again under this current scoring model.  

 

If I get to rank 1 this season, I get my Flint.  I'm just saying that so you know where I sit on this.

 

I play DDs almost exclusively.  

 

And this season has taken last season's festival of dog[exp. deleted] play and made it worse.  I didn't think it was possible, but this scoring model just encourages the most horrendously bad play I've ever seen.  

 

I can play my [edited]off in a game, score three caps and two DD kills, and I STILL get a loss - worse still, I STILL lose my star because some [exp. deleted] in a Kutuzov or perhaps an Amagi sat in back and just farmed fire damage the whole game - and the scoring model discounts caps and spotting, ranking them under damage done.  So we get teams of damage farmers screaming about "spot spot spot", and when the DDs dumb enough to listen go in and try to do it, they get hung out to dry, because said campers are too far away to support against a DD effectively.  Anyone in a DD who doesn't play the game of their life, regardless, isn't keeping a star on a loss - because there's no f'ing way to out-damage a farmer unless you get insanely lucky with a torp strike (and in high-level ranked, it is insanely lucky to manage a big strike).  

 

Well, Wargaming - here's a great big "Go [exp. deleted] yourself."  It's you guys that are responsible for this [exp. deleted] playstyle.  You've actively made it worse by giving out detection gear to every battleship (planes, hydro) and senselessly punishing secondaries to the battleships (which should come as no surprise, the top two battleships in ranked, go figure).  

 

I've never actively recommended against this game to people, but I think that it might be time to start, unless the scoring model changes - a LOT.   

 

I can hear someone now "Don't [edited] unless you've got a suggestion" - well, okay: 

Winning team:  top five players get a star only if they score over 1,000 base xp.  Bottom two gain no star.  Bottom two lose a star if they score under 600.  

Losing team:  top two players get a star only if they score over 750xp (or thereabouts).  #3 loses no star, if score is 750+.  Bottom four lose a star.  

 

XP corrections:  

Capping should count as it is now for the initial cap - and should tick 0.25% of its value for every second the cap is held for the player(s) who capped.  So after 6.66 minutes of holding a cap, the initial capping team members should have accumulated the equivalent of another cap's worth of xps.  If they only "helped" the cap, they should get the % award of this value as is appropriate for the "help".  It's a risky move to take a cap, and this rewards players who can pull it off.  

 

Spotting:

It's pretty damned rare for a ship to actually be in position to "spot" for another at this stage, particularly if the target has fired its guns.  Instead of current mechanic, 'spotting' damage should be awarded to the ship closest to the target to the tune of 30% of the "damage done" equivalent when the shots are fired - meaning when someone gets credited with damage against a target, if the target is still visible edit: was visible at the time of firing to anyone on the team, the closest friendly at the time of firing gets 30% of the value.  It also means the person awarded the damage gains only 80% of the value. This is an appropriate reward for risking more than the rest of the team.

 

Of course, some tweaking to these suggestions would be necessary, I'm only tossing these out as points to consider.  

 

But something must change here.  This has become a travesty.  Ranked isn't about winning, it's about shielding your star by farming and then relying on your team to carry you up in wins.  What you've created here encourages the absolute worst sort of play.

 

  Az

It's nice to see some constructive suggestions for supporting a more active gameplay and play for the win - even if it's funded in frustration. I am having some really bad ranked games today, but when all is said and done mostly people actually try to play for the team in my experience and I am sure that allotment of exp and credits  that visibly encourages teamplay and play for the win would emphasise that. Could be good for randoms too... Don't know if you suggestions would work in practise, but I like the ideas.

As I get the feeling that many players are not fond of reading too much and just want to press battle, i belive that "in Your Face" updates at battel end with numbers for where you got your most exp/credits would be a good addition to some "tweeks" that  encourage capping, supporting capping etc...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[NWP]
Players
5,387 posts
6,781 battles
2 hours ago, Sturmtiger_304 said:

The rank system needs way more levels, you can't squeeze the entire wows population sorted by skill level  in 50 stars. The "safe fall" ranks are a pain for us that works hard to get high up in the system, only to see a pretty average player come to a rank he/she isn't suited for.

 

Maybe ppl should be able to rank up getting First in the XP table reaching a certain amount of XP? (not sure about the latter tho...)

Yes, at some point bad players would be able to Rank up too, but it would probably take more time to do it if they play like crap?

This came to mind quickly, havent thought it really through yet, but maybe this whole star thing could be removed then? Or keep the Stars but make every Rank irrevocable. F.e. u need 4 Stars to get to next rank. With a victory, u can achieve a Star until u have to get to next rank where u will need to be first in the XP table.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
354 posts
13,859 battles

It's not about "letting bad players rank up" - it's about distinguishing the good from the bad so the goods are rewarded appropriately for their efforts.  Even a bad player can have a good day and vice versa.  

 

I just had a game where I sank four of the enemy team, scored 50k+ damage, 2 unassisted caps, on Neighbors map in Lo Yang, and only one other member of my team got a kill.  We still lost.  At least I kept my star, but most of my games today have looked like that and I lost one.  
 

I've had it.  [edited]the Flint.  This isn't fun at all, neither is it rewarding.  WG, take your Ranked and shove it.  I'm going to make sure everyone I know who likes to game hears about this garbage, as well. 

 

  Az

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[NWP]
[NWP]
Players
8,241 posts
11,737 battles

Also a big middle finger to WG for having it over Xmas AND shortening the duration...

 

Most of us actually have families, work (how do you think we fund all the P2W Prem ships?) and other commitments:Smile_sceptic:

  • Cool 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
646 posts
9,465 battles
4 minutes ago, Negativvv said:

Also a big middle finger to WG for having it over Xmas AND shortening the duration...

 

Most of us actually have families, work (how do you think we fund all the P2W Prem ships?) and other commitments:Smile_sceptic:

+1

 

That's exactly why i didn't bother with ranked this season. I focused on the two campaigns, secured those rewards, collected enough freeXP for the Nelson by the way and then took an 11-day-break from the game since i sufferend from some kind of WoWs-burnout.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
748 posts
11,447 battles
8 hours ago, Azrael_Ashemdion said:

I can hear someone now "Don't [edited] unless you've got a suggestion" - well, okay: 

Winning team:  top five players get a star only if they score over 1,000 base xp.  Bottom two gain no star.  Bottom two lose a star if they score under 600.  

Losing team:  top two players get a star only if they score over 750xp (or thereabouts).  #3 loses no star, if score is 750+.  Bottom four lose a star.  

This breaks the system.

In the best case (xp requirement is achieved) 1 star is added to the ranked system, same as now.

Imagine a Roflstomp. 2 or 3 winners score above 1k, the 2 bottom winners lose a star, top losers also lose a star (or dont get one, not specified) 3-7 also lose stars. You can easily remove  5 or 6 stars in a game because one team chickened out.

Don't reward losers, you lose, deal with it, carry harder. Maybe give 2 stars to the top scorer on the winning team. It's easy to finish top by xp in the losing team (Kutie farming BBs or DDs running around capping when the game is already over) but if you are first on the winning team you probably carried. Main focus on a game should always be winning.

 

And imo the best way to play ranked is just grinding ships or playing ships you like, finished chapy, full CM, Monarch and the chinese DD on this ranked season. Got ton of salt for the 2 last, didnt care, had fun.

  • Cool 1
  • Bad 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
354 posts
13,859 battles
1 hour ago, Negativvv said:

Also a big middle finger to WG for having it over Xmas AND shortening the duration...

 

Most of us actually have families, work (how do you think we fund all the P2W Prem ships?) and other commitments:Smile_sceptic:

 

I had totally forgotten about this too.  I'll +1 all of that.

 

6 minutes ago, Migulaitor said:

 

Imagine a Roflstomp. 2 or 3 winners score above 1k, the 2 bottom winners lose a star, top losers also lose a star (or dont get one, not specified) 3-7 also lose stars. You can easily remove  5 or 6 stars in a game because one team chickened out.

 

I don't see a problem here...?  It's a short game, the losers probably all got stomped, and if you set the expectations in advance the winners know to try for the most xps.  Stomps like this don't happen often enough to break it.

 

  Az

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[TSCC]
Players
1,698 posts
19,167 battles
7 hours ago, MrConway said:

 

This is actually good and valid feedback that you could have delivered without [exp. deleted] cursing so much.

 

I think we have shown that we are not afraid to make changes to our game modes, maybe the star system is something we can look at for the next iteration. The tricky part is making it work within the current scoring mechanics in a way that is fair and clear and easy to understand for the average player.

I wanted to play this season, played maybe 10 games and even though I won every single one I couldn't force myself to continue. Job and the New Year events took lot of my time and made my too exhausted to grind for better rank than R10. Some changes would be appreciated as currently, while they could be fun from time to time, are more usually quite frustrating and toxic.      

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[NWP]
[NWP]
Players
8,241 posts
11,737 battles

Thing is, even if you win a Flint would you play it?

 

I've played mine exactly 20 times since I won her in the T6 Ranked season.

 

Not sure if I'd play a Black although she might be interesting with Torp Acceleration...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×