Jump to content


  • Content Сount

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Battles

  • Clan


Community Reputation

18 Neutral

About drunkenduncan

  • Rank
    Petty Officer
  • Insignia

Recent Profile Visitors

422 profile views
  1. drunkenduncan

    Public Test 0.8.0 - Feedback

    Emphasizing a point brought up earlier: fighters going from 6 minutes to 30 sec on (eg) cruisers. On IJN and KM cruisers the fighter could fill a role as spotting in lieu of radar. Gone. More rebalancing needed. Think of all the times you spotted someone other side of a rock with a fighter..... and no radar IJN KM. Obvious fail is obvious.
  2. drunkenduncan

    Let's talk about changes to Ranked Battle

    You can say these things but it doesn't make them true. It feels like you are more interested in promoting your view than actually thinking about what I am saying. Its all about saving stars? Thats my point, I believe that is a mistake for WG to ever have introduced that mechanic. It goes against teamplay in a team based game. Etc and repeat myself. You promote metrics which go against teamplay in a team game, for a competitive mode. That is not logical. It IS what WG has already done however, with the save a star nonsense. They added to this with divs in ranked sprint. So you are with the tide anyways, logical or not.
  3. drunkenduncan

    Let's talk about changes to Ranked Battle

    Well actually it is. We disagree. I think a competitive mode in a team based game should have winrate as the metric, with no distracting incentives against teamplay such as save a star or best of 7 or xp grinding etc etc. We already have randoms, coop scenarios all incenting other things than winning as a team with this and that mission to eg be the first to spot x ships etc etc. You can make the grind (which is required to even out team rng) however long or short you like by playing with irrevocables and total stars, that is easy. If you think individual damage xp etc is the metric why not just go look up your stats in randoms? We already have stats on individual performance. I think ranked is a competitve mode or advertised that way anyways and in a team based game I dont see how anything other than team wins is relevant. Ranked could be pretty fun without winrate meaning much. But the whole mode would not promote teamplay in a game where teamplay and your ability to contribute to teamplay is nowhere measured individually. So maybe they should just call it 'randoms with small teams and fixed MM' and drop the whole 'competitive' angle. Dont call it ranked then is my point.
  4. drunkenduncan

    Let's talk about changes to Ranked Battle

    What is the metric for competitive play in this team based game? How much damage the individual does? Or caps? Or K/D? Or winrate? What is it? If you were to rank individual play with random teams? My point is there is no agreement on what an individual metric should be for competitive play in a random team format. WG should clarify, and maybe drop the 'competitve' word or implication from their descriptions of ranked if appropriate. Without a clear statement of how they see it, these threads will wander too and fro over a range of options which commonly diametrically oppose one another. If team wins is the metric for this team game then a clean version of ranked would have NO incentives for individual performance, just like clan battles. Too bad if you get bad teams, the grind will even that out. No more saving a star or farming xp, sry. My view. If you do some crazy top 7 thing or similarly incent individual play then winning the game starts to slip down the list of objectives when the battle timer starts. Never mind that good or excellent players hardly change playstyle, medium grade players such as myself absolutely do twist our playstyles for eg 'save a star', we do NOT play the same as we do not have the skill, when we play to save a star we can easily hurt our winrate. In this team based game. So WG should state what they think it means to achieve a rank and if it is individual damage dealing and caps and K/D with winrate sort of 'in there' somewhere then fine. Top 7 and save a star, add some more, doesn't matter they incent against winning as a team, at least it would be clear.
  5. drunkenduncan

    Rank Sprint Ship Table by win rate

    The stats site must be one of those that reports only on people who have been searched for or something.... note the average win pct, very high. Just a few ships under 50 with not so many percent games attached. If the non reporting on LT 21 games were included this would get more extreme yet. Looks like a subset of good players somehow.
  6. drunkenduncan

    Guesses for what T5 ranked will feel like?

    WG claims ranked as a competitive mode. With the metric for performance being winrate with random teams, ie as a teamplayer how do you do? Can you, over a grindy number of games (to get even team mm) show the ability to help teams and yourself to victory? An individual ranking of that ability.... in this team game. Makes sense more or less. However with divs that is nonsense. No way the 'ranking' can be any sort of individual thing when divs are in. The mode might be ok or not, not sure yet, but the 'ranked' should be dropped from the title since with divs any assessment of those playing solo is null and void. If a div on the other team has two players of say around my quality (average down the line) then I am automatically at a disadvantage, no question. Low tier rank sounds a lot of fun but like tier 7 the prems are very strong. And not available or not for free anyways. I think thats a problem for a so called competitive mode test of individual skill, skill at what exactly? To be lucky in getting a Gremy or? Tier 6 is pretty good and has some balance. They should try that with no divs, and give even team rewards like clan battles. And drop the save a star. Thats the opposite experiment of the one they are running with this tier 5 thingy, which might be a fun mode to play but its not really ranked anymore.