Jump to content
Customer Support Maintenance Read more... ×
Sign in to follow this  
You need to play a total of 50 battles to post in this section.
aviaxis

Ranked stars system

34 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

[WOTN]
Players
183 posts
13,314 battles

Hi,

 

There is a proposal of Mejash, done on youtube, related to a new, more fair ranked system, which I really support. I think it would improve a lot the ranked games playing experience...

He proposes that the first 7 base experience earners to receive the star, no matter the team they are in (the loosing or victorious one).

 

I think it's a good idea because, ranked is very competitive and becomes exhausting to play when the match making puts you over and over in bad teams. This system would also fit both types of players... the ones that want to perform well, they won't be drawn back by the ones that just want to have fun... It would also encourage people to play well, no matter the team they are in, and it would remove the frustrating factor on the "random" match making which makes your performance dependent on a team which sometimes has opposite objectives than you do...

  • Cool 1
  • Bad 2

Share this post


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

No, no way this is a good idea, do you remember all those kutiezovs farming BBs for the whole game?

Also the bottom players on the winning team can lose stars? Say bye to support ships.

 

Imo the best way is to give 2 stars to the top winner, 1 to the rest and all the losers lose 1 star.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
535 posts
6,957 battles
5 minutes ago, Migulaitor said:

No, no way this is a good idea, do you remember all those kutiezovs farming BBs for the whole game?

Also the bottom players on the winning team can lose stars? Say bye to support ships.

 

Imo the best way is to give 2 stars to the top winner, 1 to the rest and all the losers lose 1 star.

 

Kutuzov and other flamer will never be high xp earner because fire damage bring you if 0.25% xp/damage  compare to AP, next thing if you did 60k on let's say Bismark ( half of that in fires ) and I did 13k on dd i will have at least 50-75% more xp than you so it make perfect sense to reward players who play and not sniper who have zero effect in battle...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
3,168 posts
9,352 battles
55 minutes ago, aviaxis said:

Hi,

 

There is a proposal of Mejash, done on youtube, related to a new, more fair ranked system, which I really support. I think it would improve a lot the ranked games playing experience...

He proposes that the first 7 base experience earners to receive the star, no matter the team they are in (the loosing or victorious one).

 

I think it's a good idea because, ranked is very competitive and becomes exhausting to play when the match making puts you over and over in bad teams. This system would also fit both types of players... the ones that want to perform well, they won't be drawn back by the ones that just want to have fun... It would also encourage people to play well, no matter the team they are in, and it would remove the frustrating factor on the "random" match making which makes your performance dependent on a team which sometimes has opposite objectives than you do...

and this change would just make ranked more grindier. ranked star economy provides +1 star per battle now and that proposal would make it 0 star per battle. also it would make damage/xp farming goal of ranked instead of going for actual objectives.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
535 posts
6,957 battles
2 minutes ago, principat121 said:

@aviaxis

How is supporting in battle like (de)capping or spotting awarded in Base-XP? If not, your proposal will screw teamplay all day.

 

well this is a big problem in game, not just in ranked but in random also - xp reward model need some serious big change because model atm is serious BS - no point for potential damage so BB snipe and cruiser  are dodge pinata for nothing , no point for spotting , de-capping so DD are rather driving behind some lonely BB or cv for whole game and final result is 10 BB in every battle  and so on and so on...

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[ADRIA]
[ADRIA]
Players
4,945 posts
7,455 battles
1 hour ago, aviaxis said:

He proposes that the first 7 base experience earners to receive the star, no matter the team they are in (the loosing or victorious one).

 

Don't care what my team's doing, don't care if we win or lose, all I care is that I get as good of a score for myself as possible - that's exactly how it would play out. So... no thank you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[CR33D]
[CR33D]
Players
1,919 posts
21,166 battles
48 minutes ago, Migulaitor said:

Imo the best way is to give 2 stars to the top winner, 1 to the rest and all the losers lose 1 star.

Unless there is some changes XP calculation I agree that this could be acceptable solution. Be on winning team and not get a star is ridicules just because for some reason you haven't get enough base XP. I know why people want changes but this could mean that you do great job for team but not so much personally and you are not awarded for that and that is unacceptable.

 

Maybe giving some side missions over number of games which will be class based that could give you additional star no matter did your team win or lose wouldn't be bad idea. Award DDs for spotting, capping or contesting the cap, BBs for some amount of tanked damage over the games or whatever. Something that will require skill and teamplay to do and award you for that.

 

there are many options but WG should at first improve MM at least for ranked battles. Ships like Belfast and Fiji or Indianapolis and Pensacola should not be considered as appropriate match in MM as that could give one team significant advantage over other team. 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
2,844 posts
14,993 battles
3 hours ago, aviaxis said:

...He proposes that the first 7 base experience earners to receive the star, no matter the team they are in (the loosing or victorious one)...

So, victory is unimportant.  DD players are better off not scouting or screening?  Defensive smoke... why, a dead teammate is one less competitor. 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[AAO]
Players
401 posts
7,687 battles

Ranked needs to get rid of bad players who got carried in the first place, or dont let them progres out of kinder garden league. But how is that achievable i dont know. 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[CR33D]
[CR33D]
Players
1,919 posts
21,166 battles
37 minutes ago, Guillotine said:

Ranked needs to get rid of bad players who got carried in the first place, or dont let them progres out of kinder garden league. But how is that achievable i dont know. 

I doubt that anybody could get carried to R1 all the way. Even if somebody reach R1 with 40% WR that would mean that in 60% of games he lost he need to be a top player in loosing team in many of them just to keep star.  Maybe it will take longer for bad players to get R1 but you can hardly prevent him for doing so unless there is some filter for participation in Ranked at all, for example over 50% general WR or something like that. But then again you are excluding a large proportion of players and as more and more players reach R1 queue times will consequently become longer and longer and that is just as bad. 

 

Introducing more stars for rank but make winning team star distribution uneven, for example 3 stars for top player, 2 stars for 2-4, 1star for 5-7, or give some class based side missions that could give you additional star for doing what that class is supposed to do, for showing a skill or/and teamplay no matter did you end up in the winning or loosing team. I think that it would be ridicules that member of the winning time don't get a star, unless of course if he is AFK, but WG needs to find some way to award players who shows skills and teamplay more. Such player should be awarded by more stars or with some goodies like flags and camos or whatever.

 

Ranked mode needs some changes but I'm against any that will prevent somebody from at least trying it by putting some restrictions for them just so that small number of players could 'enjoy' them more.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[WOTN]
Players
183 posts
13,314 battles
2 hours ago, Culiacan_Mexico said:

So, victory is unimportant.  DD players are better off not scouting or screening?  Defensive smoke... why, a dead teammate is one less competitor. 

of course victory is important, you get more base exp if you win...

this model eliminates the situations in which players doing nothig are carried by their teams and better players on the other side loose their stars... I think it's just fair

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
2,844 posts
14,993 battles
36 minutes ago, aviaxis said:

of course victory is important, you get more base exp if you win...

this model eliminates the situations in which players doing nothig are carried by their teams and better players on the other side loose their stars... I think it's just fair

Currently in ranked, team play by DDs out weights personal performance, but that system would work differently, and would mean DD players should play very selfishly.  Skirt the map and go for damage.

 

I don't have to win because I know in most cases the enemy team will have a player that is worse than me... will score lower.  I can get that seventh spot from the opposing players, as long as no one on my team does better than me.  Every member of my team that has a poor game means my odds of getting a star are increased.  This game mode would force me to actively work against my competitors... my own team.

 

I could get to rank one without ever have won a game... using sabotage.  This would go toxic very quickly.

 

IMO

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
2,154 posts
13,026 battles
7 hours ago, aviaxis said:

Hi,

 

There is a proposal of Mejash, done on youtube, related to a new, more fair ranked system, which I really support. I think it would improve a lot the ranked games playing experience...

He proposes that the first 7 base experience earners to receive the star, no matter the team they are in (the loosing or victorious one).

 

I think it's a good idea because, ranked is very competitive and becomes exhausting to play when the match making puts you over and over in bad teams. This system would also fit both types of players... the ones that want to perform well, they won't be drawn back by the ones that just want to have fun... It would also encourage people to play well, no matter the team they are in, and it would remove the frustrating factor on the "random" match making which makes your performance dependent on a team which sometimes has opposite objectives than you do...

 So basically 14 player FFA where teamplay goes down the drain, everybody and their mother sits back and farms dont give a F*** what happens to the team?

 

That is one of the worst ideas I've heard yet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
1,388 posts

What about this one?

After a game in ranked you must vote as the winning team who does NOT win a star.

And as the losing team you must vote who does NOT lose a star. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
2,844 posts
14,993 battles
21 minutes ago, GarrusBrutus said:

What about this one?

After a game in ranked you must vote as the winning team who does NOT win a star.

And as the losing team you must vote who does NOT lose a star. 

Devils Advocate: I can't trust my team mates to play their ships well, but I am suppose to trust them to know who actually played poorly or who played well?

 

 

Share this post


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

 

Kutuzov and other flamer will never be high xp earner because fire damage bring you if 0.25% xp/damage  compare to AP, next thing if you did 60k on let's say Bismark ( half of that in fires ) and I did 13k on dd i will have at least 50-75% more xp than you so it make perfect sense to reward players who play and not sniper who have zero effect in battle...

 

Makes perfect sense but I saw a huge amount of kuties playing to save the star and managing to do it. Without cruiser support your DDs get rekt  and can't cap so less xp for them, your BBs then have no screaning also less xp for them.

 

 

Just reward the winner and punish the loser.

"But my team is bad" Carry harder

"But I am the best on my team"  Carry harder

"But.." Carry harder, git gud.

WR will put each one on his place.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
535 posts
6,957 battles
3 minutes ago, Migulaitor said:

 

Makes perfect sense but I saw a huge amount of kuties playing to save the star and managing to do it. Without cruiser support your DDs get rekt  and can't cap so less xp for them, your BBs then have no screaning also less xp for them.

 

 

Just reward the winner and punish the loser.

"But my team is bad" Carry harder

"But I am the best on my team"  Carry harder

"But.." Carry harder, git gud.

WR will put each one on his place.

 

That is all really nice if there is not players with 500-1200 battle in 1 ranked season - at least what WG should and must do is limit the number of battles for rank 10 and than 5 and than 3, also system that top 2 get 2 star in wining team would be a step in right direction ..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[CR33D]
[CR33D]
Players
1,919 posts
21,166 battles
47 minutes ago, Cime said:

 

That is all really nice if there is not players with 500-1200 battle in 1 ranked season - at least what WG should and must do is limit the number of battles for rank 10 and than 5 and than 3, also system that top 2 get 2 star in wining team would be a step in right direction ..

 

Limiting numbers of battles is not practical solution. Again what would happen when large number of players exceed allowed quota? Probably longer queue time especially in the last couple of weeks. So what is a point having somewhat better players when you have to wait for 20-30 min for battle. Also is there are only good players left probability that you'll need more games to reach R1 will also increase which could mead that you'll might not reach R1 simple because you run out of games quota.

 

If you are good player or you are at least giving your best you should be able to progress faster than those less skilled but not by limiting their chances but improving yours. If somebody carry the team to victory then why not give him two stars. Or give one star for victory and additional star if player gets base XP over some value like 1k or 75% of average or whatever. There are many solutions and yes none of them is perfect but current system need improvement. But any new solution can't punish player in a winning team by not giving him star unless of course if he is AFK. How system will know if he somebody is carried or just having a bad game or he did a good job by doing actions that are just not awarded properly with XP. Even if he was just a target for enemy that would mean that every enemy ships that is targeting him is not targeting you. If that is not teamplay than I don't know what is :Smile-_tongue:

 

For AFK players there should be some ban either temporary over number of days or permanent exclusion from Ranked season.

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
535 posts
6,957 battles

what "afk" players do to avoid be afk is wait till fight start direct ship and put it full speed to the cap, they will either die in first 1-2 min or will go to the port right after he direct ship toward the cap - no system can track him as afk, maybe if you die in 120/360 sec to lose a star no meter win or lose would be effective - don't know ...

 

But 2 stars for top 2 player in wining team would be very good and would solve  a lot of problem and make ranked more competitive ..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[CR33D]
[CR33D]
Players
1,919 posts
21,166 battles
9 minutes ago, Cime said:

what "afk" players do to avoid be afk is wait till fight start direct ship and put it full speed to the cap, they will either die in first 1-2 min or will go to the port right after he direct ship toward the cap - no system can track him as afk, maybe if you die in 120/360 sec to lose a star no meter win or lose would be effective - don't know ...

 

But 2 stars for top 2 player in wining team would be very good and would solve  a lot of problem and make ranked more competitive ..

 

As I said there is no perfect system. How system will know that somebody just suicide the ship or being deleted early by BB volley, CV or DD torps? Team that have such player in his ranks usually lose, it could win but by my experience it usually lose a game. Hardly anybody could be carried with that kind of behavior all the way, he will need to be really really really lucky to, more often then not, end in a good team that could win with player down. Especially at the higher ranks.

 

I would prefer if top player get second star by being a top player while others could get second star by some other measure, for example by certain number of base XP or whatever.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
535 posts
6,957 battles
51 minutes ago, fumtu said:

 

I would prefer if top player get second star by being a top player while others could get second star by some other measure, for example by certain number of base XP or whatever.

 

This would work great - that would compensate by a lot those lost game because you  had yolotard or afk player or some "special" team in game ..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[ADRIA]
[ADRIA]
Players
4,945 posts
7,455 battles
23 hours ago, Cime said:

fire damage bring you if 0.25% xp/damage

Care to list your sources?

 

Bcuz it's long since confirmed you don't earn xp / credits for dmg dealt, you earn them for % maxHP of enemy dealt. Thus killing a full HP DD gives you as much as killing a full HP BB. And thus fire gives you constant xp / credit income regardless of target (while your dmg number is very dependent on your target selection) as it's already % maxHP based

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
535 posts
6,957 battles
26 minutes ago, wilkatis_LV said:

Care to list your sources?

 

Bcuz it's long since confirmed you don't earn xp / credits for dmg dealt, you earn them for % maxHP of enemy dealt. Thus killing a full HP DD gives you as much as killing a full HP BB. And thus fire gives you constant xp / credit income regardless of target (while your dmg number is very dependent on your target selection) as it's already % maxHP based

 

 

 

yup - me in Hindi and my friend in Yamato tried this 1 game - I did 108k dam and he did 98k dam, I had about 50k fire dam on 1 GK and other HE dam including even  some 4-5.000 on DD and about 5-8k on cruiser while he had 16k on cruiser and all the rest on other GK all from AP..

 

at the end we win he was 3th with 1860xp and I was 6th with 1250xp

 

and form 2 days before some random result - I did 138k in Hindi on multiple target about 60-70k fire dam and I got around 1600xp and next battle was my awful game in Montana where I did 58k dam some 20k on cruiser, 5800 dam on gearing and all the rest on BB and I got 1780xp and was 3th !!?!?!?!?!?!

 

You got that one mode from Aslain that give you the number of damage you deal in game ( not at the end ) and there it will only show you damage you have done to other ships and it will not show you / include damage from fire or flooding - that mod is connected to formula of how WG calculate your damage in game and give you xp at the end ( damage xp )

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
748 posts
11,447 battles
47 minutes ago, Cime said:

 

yup - me in Hindi and my friend in Yamato tried this 1 game - I did 108k dam and he did 98k dam, I had about 50k fire dam on 1 GK and other HE dam including even  some 4-5.000 on DD and about 5-8k on cruiser while he had 16k on cruiser and all the rest on other GK all from AP..

 

at the end we win he was 3th with 1860xp and I was 6th with 1250xp

 

and form 2 days before some random result - I did 138k in Hindi on multiple target about 60-70k fire dam and I got around 1600xp and next battle was my awful game in Montana where I did 58k dam some 20k on cruiser, 5800 dam on gearing and all the rest on BB and I got 1780xp and was 3th !!?!?!?!?!?!

 

You got that one mode from Aslain that give you the number of damage you deal in game ( not at the end ) and there it will only show you damage you have done to other ships and it will not show you / include damage from fire or flooding - that mod is connected to formula of how WG calculate your damage in game and give you xp at the end ( damage xp )

Different ships, different xp multipliers :Smile_Default:

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.

×