Jump to content

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'ranked battles'.

More search options

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


  • World of Warships - News and Information
    • News And Announcements
    • Update Notes
    • Public Test
    • Surveys
  • General WoWS Discussion
    • General Game Discussion
    • Team Play
    • Support
    • Discussions about Warships
    • Historical Discussions and Studies
    • Player Modifications
  • Support
  • International Forums
    • Foro en Español
    • Fórum Brasileiro
  • Contest Entries
  • Contest Entries
  • New Captains
  • Guías y Estrategias
  • Árboles Tecnológicos
  • Fan Art and Community Creations
  • Community Created Events and Contests
  • Support


  • World of Warships Event Calendar

Found 76 results

  1. Hello Captains! Sorry, I was on vacation last week so no weekly thought. Let's move on to this week's. So what are your thoughts on Ranked Battles so far? Frustrations? Celebrations? Feedback to possibly make it better? Thanks for your constructive feedback!
  2. I am putting out my own video on this nonsense. For now, here's first my critique of Mr. Not-good-enough-Ser. It's impressive how the big three community contributors can get what they want consistently, yet the unforeseen changes they recieve invariably worsen their experience, and they proceed to complain about the very features they asked for to make the game either competitive, or to negate the role of specific ship classes. I wonder what this persistent targeting or casual ship players or ship classes will eventually yield them TL:DR Version- Notser proposes a problem with the game is Experience Gain (XP), and projects issues with his gameplay onto others I contend the game has many gameplay aspects and designs that already reward players, and other edits, such as more irrevocable ranks, or lesser penalties in ranked would help players more than a completely reworked XP model that almost benefits exclusively Destroyers Let's move onto the specific points I make by almost minute by minute bases: 1:00 “They have min-maxed XP . . . this is Wargaming’s fault” For someone who has not hesitated previously to call out the performance of “players” in Battleships rather than focus on the game design; and then cosign blame only somewhat adequately to the company. Later saddling it [poor gameplay] on the players and demanding the company change smoke and dispersion to make Battleships irrelevant, this is perhaps the most ironic thing you could possibly say. Now I haven’t even gotten into the particulars of the ironies of him discussing Experience specifically, which I will do shortly. 1:24 “What is the correct play, contesting . . . and being engaged with the enemy” Problem there, your smoke changes from the 6.0 patches made diving a cap with the biggest guns possible to provide area denial blew that meta up. So now you’re getting your comeuppance; call it Catharsis III. Never mind it’s hard to differentiate from a good versus suicidal push because plenty of situations, even for good or bad players, are catch 22s. You have to push so you may just hope and pray to rally the cowards on your team to follow; or sit in the back and reinforce the risk aversion to a push. It’s very much a “bystander effect” situation a lot of players will find themselves in unless you’re fairly confident or skilled. Sadly, the most confident people [people willing to dive a cap early] tend to be the saltiest and occasionally [not always] the least skilled, call it the Dunning–Kruger effect [When they blame the team or long-range players]. 1:38 “XP isn’t enough to justify the risk or reward” This is ironic consider the number of games one can get first strictly through the crazy XP rate you get from capping now This also ignores you know proper risk aversion analysis because what you truly RISK is the star, you don’t risk XP. To be fair, early on, it’s quite easy to detect whether or not your team is up to snuff to win, and you can easily figure out when it’s time to start being selfish to preserve your progress, because it costs too much to lose given the current ranked structure. 1:48 “From 20km save your star and move on to the next game” Would you advise a Zao or Hindenberg to play differently? I have [had] the sneaking suspicion he’s about to mention battleships here. 2:03 “I don’t want that wargaming, I don’t think you should be punished for trying to win the game” I agree with the latter sentiment, I disagree with the first. You specifically asked for this, and seemed to have simply forgotten how teamwork operates in the grand scheme of things. You do run into incompetent teams that will have 4 or 5 ships crowd a single smoke, but at least when smoke worked, you could actually deny area and encourage aggression since your fights would have to be closer; which is where radar meta came in. Actually, thinking about it, I disagree with your second sentiment as well; because had you actually believed that statement, then what do you think quote, “cowardly” play of ships is other than ships attempting to do their part to win the game? After all, this is universal as a tip, if you survive later into your games as a statistic, you can exert more influence and opportunities to actually win or carry games. You’re no good dead early and earning top XP. 2:14 “Now long range player are trying to win the game . . . they are not giving up everything.” My point exactly; that’s almost by definition how games work [do not give up everything]. Perhaps you’re not a historian or a truly competive gamer, but you don’t shove all in unless you’re about to lose or are truly desperate. Ironically, as the game situation gets worse, some battleships, if they’re smart, will suddenly become more aggressive so they can farm as much damage and XP as possible. Perhaps that had not occurred to you as well. 2:20 “They’re playing it just enough to where, well if we lose, well I’m not losing” Freud would have a field day with you. Classic projection, or did you forget your classic declaration during the 6.0 patches; “It’s MY smoke, only I should use it”. To explain more precisely, I go back again, would you advise say a Hindenberg, Zao, or in this case we’ll include Yueyangs and Shimakaze’s to play differently? They’re not just “playing it just enough” as it turns out harassing the enemy from a distance often provokes a hasty push which your team can exploit. Then again I guess you’re not much of a team player are you? Also your logic, “If we lose, I’m not” basically crumbles if say, there are more than 1 ship remaining both attempting to farm at the end of the game. Normally then you have no guarantee that “You” won’t lose. Then it comes down to who dies last or who farms the most damage in a suicide push. Though this as you or Zoup may claim from my other parts can easily say “this is too general of a statement to be held under scrutiny.” 2:48 “The system isn’t nuanced enough . . . “ So you would like a system that would make it more fun and rewarding to offset the risks associating with pushing or making tough decisions. Or as one of your compatriots puts it “Dumb it down to the lowest common denominator.” –Flamu Now Ironically, despite the denigrating nature that formerly yourself, Flamu, or even Zoup as of late would assign to that, I’d appreciate such a change myself, the problem is of course that would make the game; much less the literal skilled segment of it; ranked play, by definition, targeted toward a casual audience, which is not what you wanted in the first place anyway. I’d appreciate a system nuanced or rewarding enough to offset the painful risks in the game, but that likely won’t happen. 3:02 “I’m really tired of the meta being dictated by what’s the easiest” That’s, partially what metas are; path of least resistance; or more exactly; what will get you blasted wins. In context of this statement, I ask you a denigrating question NoZoupForYou asked us all, “Why are you playing” then? 3:06 “Guess what the easiest this season is? Long range support ships . . .” So basically the same meta since ranked season 6? Never mind we by definition have to ignore 1 through 5 because those kind of cruisers were not in the game yet, and I do not have the data specifically on them, though I can’t imagine it was different then. 3:21 “I hate that a player who wants to play a specific ship is denied that right, . . . [the matchups] are too volatile.” Jesus, I wonder why in the world that is: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sGofBzE5_ag NoZoupForYou on Battleships https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6A7VGOPhhh0 NoZouForYou on Battleships https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZMDKrRdVAqc Flamu on Battleships https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pTCgNKujaXM Flamu on “Casuals” and Battleships, via Conqueror https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_68vnTIbsas Notser on 6.11 Changes https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w6nuAC6CnlI Notser “What’s up with me” Digging in your heels 3:34 “This is coming from a DD player” So sit in the back and snipe with torpedoes and quit complaining. You have the second least difficult time in Ranked. What are you complaining about? Is it battleships? I bet it’s battleships. 3:45 “You have all the radar cruisers being punished for being in a position that could threaten their ship” Yeah, and I’m getting tired of being reported for dying first, but I have to be up there, but let’s hear what the anti-Battleship captain has to say about it. 3:46 “Same with the DDs” What? 3:47 “Even the CVs” I’m guessing you’ve not encountered many CVs or DDs despite being a DD captain, but in cases where you’re caught out by radar, you’re not playing long range support . . . you know, the Cruiser’s or Battleship’s job. Remember, longest radar is 12 km, surely you know that. 4:09 “This can’t be the final implementation of XP” Why haven’t you talked instead of placing more irrevocable ranks so that the risk aversion to losing stars is not as great or the very fact losing costs a star rather than just, stagnating a player in position? Would that make the game too casual? How is rank’s structure XPs fault? Oh and on the note about domination, easy for DDs, hard for CVs, but in either case do what I did what Flamu, you, and Zoup demanded I do . . . play, better. Or I am forced to ask Zoup’s question again. “Why are you playing?” 4:18 “It is influencing the way players do every action” I’m sorry, did my previous video, forum posts, comments, and flurry of cursing and swearing, and general feedback go over everyone’s heads? Are we finally acknowledging risk aversion affects us and what 6.11 on after did was amplify our risk aversion? Probably not. 4:42 “It has rewarded the wrong play style universally” Either, you’re not playing it right, or you do not understand risk reward. More to the point, if the problem you find is in all the games, since every single game, not just ones that happen to be produced by Wargaming, have this issue, quote “Rewarding the wrong behavior”, then maybe it’s just you. Oddly the elites all behave in ways the general public do not wish to or ardently refrain from behaving in. To provide an analogy; If you’ve dated dozens of women, they’ve all either turned you down or you’ve broken up with them, and you go “You know what all these women look for the wrong stuff in a guy”, maybe it’s not them. Maybe it’s you who suck. 5:25 “Can we get XP correct for once, please?” Two things, given you just said none of the Wargaming games do this, perhaps it’s high time you realize it’s not being designed for you. More specifically, if they have never done it right, and since we’re including World of Tanks, they’ve not done it right in over 5 years of programing and development and professional marketing, their version of correct seems to conflict with your version of correct. Second, let’s go back a little on this basis to his point about Mediums. Now, as much as I hate to say historical realism plays a part; consider these are more so Arcade War games, not War simulators; Mediums are built if The Chieftain is to be believed, to counter other tanks, other TDs, generally a jack of all trades, and they are rewarded accordingly, especially being both historically, and in gaming the most prolific and versatile tank. You don’t get brownie points for being a specialist if it just so happened something else did your job at the same time. They’re competing against you, intentionally or not, and as far as Light versus Medium versus Heavy ought to be concerned, just be happy you in your example have Mediums that could perform those tasks at all. By extension, I wish to take this time to point out, in theory using my example Battleships ought to be the highest XP earners, but invariably and ironically, you cannot accurately just hand them the first place spot in ranked. Strangely I’d say it’s almost perfectly balanced in terms of who can get first on a losing term based on the game design in terms of XP. I personally would argue DDs get top billing almost all the time, but I would need data to back that up, and I don’t have it on hand at the moment. 5:30 “Couldn’t we see a system that rewards the right actions, that are agreed upon” No, because the two presumptions built into that is one, there are “Right” actions, and two, most importantly, that we can agree to them. We cannot even agree whether or not Destroyer Advantage is a reality, much less whether or not Battleships are in their quote “Right place” in the game. We cannot even agree upon “Why we’re playing”. 5:51 Points on Capping No, m0ostly because I don’t imagine you’ve been in games where your team has all caps, while the enemy simply bypasses them in exchange for murdering all of you for the win despite having cap lead. Dispute that at your leisure, the opposite has definitely happened as well, but surely you know early cap advantage can evaporate stupidly fast with or without an XP change. Fittingly your proposed change would benefit almost exclusively destroyers, the things that can get in and out of caps and defend or contest them fast enough; so selfishly you just want a system that makes you look good, guarantees you get the most XP every time, forget the others. 6:04 “Why isn’t there a reward for that” Because even I know, and all of you know and won’t hesitate to point this out, being out of position earns you nothing. It’s fine if I’m area denying the C cap and have my guns there, but if I’m out of position, unable to shoot anything . . . I’m not contributing anything to the fight; and it is the fight we’re ultimately concerned about. If I’m not in position to fight, what good am I, move my [edited]from the mountain and get stuck in. “Oh, but I brought up already that you’d be punished!” So? It’s a risk I have to take. Do I want to earn my star more, or do I want to ensure I lose the least? One of which freezes me in place, the other actually gets me somewhere, and no one would defend me if I chose to hold my ground close to the enemy, behind hard cover, but couldn’t do anything else but spot. 6:09 “Long range ships don’t seem to want to capture the base” Yeah, but you know what they want to do, fight, survive, they want to attack if possible, but it’s no good to anyone to get in close to fight typically unless you’re a destroyer and no one can see you drop your torpedoes. . . oh wait. Oh, as an aside. It’s not their job to cap. Guess who’s it is. 6:18 “What’s the deal wargaming?” I don’t know, what’s the deal Notser? Not enough rewards for your specific play style? Well you’re one of our unofficial PR people, let’s change that to make it easier for you to look Unicum, would that help Dunning-Kruger? 6:26 “Give you XP for when it’s contested . . .” It’s called your hit ribbons, they already built it in. Oh and if the cap is flipping, defense ribbons. Enjoy 6:34 “Gain defender points while in it” We’ll ignore you contradict yourself, softly, from before talking about being useless sitting in the cap and I’ll briefly explain from a designer perspective why that doesn’t exist: Because the attacker is not actively in the state of flipping the cap to their side. They’re already earning XP for shooting the target. You only get credit for assaulting a cap, when you . . . assault the cap. 6:39 “Nobody knows how to actually play the game” Ghosts of 6.11 are coming up, is someone about to blame battleships? Oh and “nobody” knows how to play the game, but you do? See point about and analogy about dating women and concluding they all suck, which gives you an excuse not to change your mind about what you’re doing. 6:49 “The XP system doesn’t teach you how to play correctly” Besides maybe World of Warcraft, name a single game where XP takes up the place of the tutorial. Since when has gold, credits, XP or what have you ‘taught’ someone how to play. Yes, if we use the classical behavioral psychology approach and say “Well rewards dictate your behavior through positive reinforcement”, yes, but as it turns out you’re also ignoring “Positive punishment” and since the human mind tends to amplify our negative experiences, guess what has way more impact as a behavioral reinforcement than XP. Never mind your XP quite quickly becomes worthless to you in the late or even mid game of warships, so it’s perhaps the least effective reward mechanism you can offer unless it was the Gold Free XP . . . but that would cost the company money. 6:50 “It only rewards selfish play” So being the best is selfish? I suppose you mean strictly on the losing side in the context of ranked, but keep in mind your proposed changes would have impact outside of ranked as well. Then again you and the other two in the Big Three seem to lack a lot of foresight. Let’s put it like this then since apparently it’s selfish. On a selfless, well coordinated team, versus a team of all selfish players. . . who will win? That is by definition a loaded question, but your general statement implies that somehow being selfish alone is far more rewarding than the inverse. 7:04 “Some sort of XP for being close to the capture base” Or conversely make the bases bigger then. Effectively same result technically, but you want XP I imagine over time, which either, benefits almost exclusively destroyers and cruisers who can get on point first. You brought up CVs, and unless you mean XP through planes by proxy as well, this won’t help them at all, it would in fact be detrimental to anyone who wants to meaningfully grind CVs, because what’s the point if I can get through other trees faster? 7:17 “I hate players who have to have three bases” Like who? Since when? 7:20 “You only need to have more points than the enemy team at the end of the game” Your point? (Considering the statement before is unrealistic and/or moot) 7:24 “Why are you pushing into the enemy” Well make up your mind, you either want XP, or aggression or you don’t. Arguably, you asking this question means 6.11 worked exactly the way you wanted; and now you’re complaining about aggression warranted or otherwise? 7:38 “We have base lead, they have a ship deficit, why are you pushing in?” If you’re not going to be blasted specific then this doesn’t matter. In that case because it’s the prudent thing to do. Call it from Starcraft the Day9 Rule: “When you’re ahead, get more ahead” “But Spoor, I just said that’s stupid, and you could very well throw the match that way”, yes, but a good team corned in that situation can make an effort to come back and then they get to dictate the terms of the fight, not you; That! That is why you keep attacking when you’re ahead, you drive them to a corner and 7:45 “I’ve probably lost 20 games like that, this season” That’s it? Is that the only way you’ve lost. I suppose I could take the time to look at the total number of ranked battles you’ve played this season, but let’s use my own for example. Then Of the 68 I’ve played, so I’d lose 1 in 3 on aggressive pushes that went bad while I had the lead. So where does the other 1/3 come from because it took me 13 battles to go from 10.2 to 9.0, the point-2 being two stars in Rank 2, versus rank 9 with no stars. While I appreciate the appeal to emotion, give me data, then may be I’ll give you credit for this point, but there are far stupider ways people are losing out there. Also somewhat hypocritical to bring up a push that went wrong, when the whole first half of this video was long-range ships playing like cowards . . . Specifically in this scenario of an unwarranted push, they they’re doing exactly the right thing and winning the match. Way to defeat your own point, you imbecile you. 8:05 “and I don’t see anything wrong with that because that’s what we want.” No, that’s what you want, never mind the fact you’ve not weighed the consequences of your statements at all like back in 6.11, nor considered viable alternatives that somewhat meet this nonsensical critique you have on specifically Experience all of a sudden rather than ranked game design itself. 8:14 “We don’t want them operating at max gun range” You don’t want them, quit projecting. Never mind that with stealth fire gone, smoke gone, and your own contradiction on how an aggressive push with the lead may cost a game simply reinforces that max range behavior from cruisers primarily, with BBs finally operating as the meat shields in front. Perhaps you’ve not won using these tactics yourself and that’s why you’re suddenly raging against them. I’m perfectly satisfied, win or lose so far, with understanding it’s my job to set fires on Battleships, be close enough to my DDs to support at 13 km to deny space to other destroyers with HE. Make it as hard as possible, or painful as possible for the enemy to win, make them sweat, make them quit. I have to say, it seems to working at least on you. 8:18 “And not helping their team at all at the capture point” I seem to recall someone saying literally minutes ago “You don’t need all three caps”. Also, if I’m alive, and setting fires, or doing damage, how am I not helping the team. Now there are specific context which I can be completely alone in say the 1 or 10 columns, using a spotter and hitting targets, but in now way killing the low health push on my team or denying destroyers position; but there’s that, the image you wish to portray, and then there’s the person who uses range and position to their advantage. 8:27 “Let’s give ribbons for spotting enemies, using radar” I suppose he does not anticipate that this can be exploited by radar ships, including the Yueyang just spam consumables to farm XP and sail away without actually fighting if the team is losing in order to save stars specifically in ranked. Later says having a ship die while under effect, which is already done, spotting damage is granted for that, though I suppose he doesn’t remember 6.11 at all, though I cannot earnestly say when spotting and position were given XP in matches. I suppose he just wants that sweet sweet DD XP for himself because I fail to see how any of this would help any other class at all. 8:43 “Smoke on an enemy who’s dying” Already in game, depends on what the dying ally does from that point on, because if they survive; however, do not continue fighting in any way, besides the points saved, what have you accomplished? Besides other times sometimes true potatoes will simply sail out of it anyway, so how do you picture this being programmed in? 8:46 “These are such simple simple things to check . . .” Spoken like a true person who’s never programmed any logic loops in his life. Never mind I cannot claim to have been anywhere near talented enough to program the same loops that would check Boolean values and factions of health to delineate the amount of XP per Hit Point or per position per unit of time. Ignoring that, each of those scenarios or spotting items is circumstantial and you only get XP, or rather, continue to get XP by virtue of your use in game already assuming you fight. Again, no brownie points for spotting torpedoes and then sailing into them anyway. Though I suppose that will give the Z-52 player like himself far more to farm XP off of. Is anyone here noticing a pattern? 9:12 “It’s the same with DD, CV, CA . .. “ Ah, but not Battleships, but I suppose they don’t deserve it even though your examples for long range mostly apply to Moskva’s, Hindenbergs, and Zao’s using max range and concealment to effect. Also, they’re not remotely the same. I understand your delusion and desire for them to be the same, but how can a CV position to cap, or what consumables aside from heal or AA do they get? What about cruisers who cannot take forward positions because they’re out-spotted by 5km by any destroyer on approach, and out-spotted by some cruisers if you’re the Chapayev or Moskva. How is it the same for them. It might, just might, be for the Minotaur, but even for it, it would struggle with or without smoke, with or without radar getting into position without dying upon being spotted as you noted before. Then for destroyers, given not all destroyers even play the same blasted way, I.E. a Khabarovsk versus Z-52, these two ships have insanely different play styles from each other and must assault positions differently understanding their separate limitations. Though I appreciate your gross oversight in order to favor your own ship class. 9:20 “Why are we rewarding long range gunnery so much?” Because that’s where the fight is lost or won sir; normally won. 9:30 “Why is that not a priority” Because either specifically for assaults and defending, that’s put into the game already and for consumables, why should we reward potentially wasted resources? “But I mean only when the resources are used for effect”, yes, and there’s already spotting XP and stat trackers in game, and you claim they are grossly inadequate? I’ve seen zero-damage destroyers score around middle in the team in randoms strictly through spotting and potential damage. I suppose that’s not good enough for you. 9:35 “That seems like the most important thing to me.” Stop and repeat this to yourself until you realize the chief problem for the past 9 and a half minutes of ranting and bad ideas. 9:50 “There are so many things that Wargaming could do to enhance the team aspect of the game” Like bring back pre 6.11 smoke, oh wait . . . 9:55 “Through manipulating a players tendencies through reward” And others by punishment, though so far it sounds like you want everyone to play your game, not their game, which I am afraid to say is a common trap you, Zoup and Flamu fall into, demanding that the population play your game, rather than the population demanding you play ours. Granted I cannot even claim to be part of the population based on the number of ships I have or my stats anymore. I spent so much time getting better so I may be listened to, only to find myself the hypocrite now, having excluded myself from others experiences to be able to connect to yours so you would no longer ignore me, ignore us. “Seal clubbing potato” with no skill, I haven’t forgotten Flamu’s words, his fourth NA Forum post ever, direct at someone who presumably he didn’t care about. 10:00 “You’re missing out so much with this ribbon system” Besides wargaming itself, what ribbon system or what games are you comparing this to conceptually? Star Trek: Online, where mutual support an science abilities do correlate to a little bit of XP if I remember correctly. Red Alert 3, Starcraft 2, League of Legends, what are you correlating this inane demand in design to? To be fair, thanks to your critique, what I used to take for granted, the Capture Point XP, Defended Ribbons, Spotting Damage, Damage over Time, Fires, Module Knockouts, Secondary Hits, I had never stopped to think of all this stuff that I never thought about was already given to me, also, and most especially giving players credits and XP for earning, for being in the fight, getting tough and ready to try to fight and win. I never realized how much effort the teams have made to reward players for their efforts intentionally or not, it’s amazing to think about. Now obviously plenty of improvements need to be made, but consistently somehow you aim at something completely different or irrelevant; or if you do aim at the relevant problem, you invariably suggest things that make the game worse. “But that’s just your opinion, you think the game has gotten worse” Well, true, but of course it wasn’t just me saying the changes asked for made things worse. Need I point to Notser’s, Zoup’s and Flamu’s videos on clan wars, smoke changes and the commentary made as of late? It’s like patch whack-a-mole with you three morons. Talk to the rest of us when you have actually good ideas. 10:04 “I want this game to succeed, I want players to play this and feel I am rewarded for my action.” No you don’t, otherwise why would you or anyone been in favor of half the insane changes you demanded or suggested we good. No you don’t, otherwise you’d actually insist for changes that appeal to casual gamers, like bringing back Tier V to operations or including an irrevocable rank at Rank 5 which would minimize the impact of people playing to preserve stars since risk of dropping a lower rank is halved. No you don’t, because almost entirely all these changes appeal directly to something your class of ship is singularly capable of and you’ve deliberately excluded a class that you and your little friends have decided don’t deserve a place, much less a voice, in this game. Talk to me when that is amended. 10:30 “We gotta do something about this XP” Notser, have you, specifically, been losing stars because you didn’t get enough XP. Join the blasted club buddy. But audience, you know what that means, wait for 7.5 to have a massive patch for XP, and all your destroyers leap to the top of the scoreboards in randoms from now on, everyone else doesn’t deserve it. I mean I remember the last time he begged like this, he, and his buddies got exactly what they wanted and complained about it after they got it because it made another part of their experience worse. 10:42 “The game is not doing a good enough job empowering them to play the right way” You keep using this, which is a way to weasel in what you believe is the way the game ought to operate as if that were fact. The fact of the matter is, the game does plenty to empower players to quote, play the right way. Otherwise why would Flamu point out how insanely good the Asashio, despite it’s inability to deal with cruisers, still is. The game does empower players. Why at tier ten do the Z-52 and the Khabarovsk, despite nerfs, continue to dominate games? Do you think your class of ship needs to be nerfed more to reward Battleships and Cruisers more? Are you prepared to go to that extent? 11:00 “I can’t wait. . .” You know what, I only partially agree. I can’t wait for things just to be blasted ok, things to be adequate without people like you jacking it up for the rest of us, or misrepresenting the community’s opinion on how a ship should or should not play. I’m waiting for a day when you actually aim to please the community rather than things that please you. I’m almost begging the devs to bring stealth fire back just to shut people like you up because fine, I’ll take the hit if just to throw the “skilled” players who used stealth previously to get back into this game. I’ll take a really painful hit to my gameplay if it just means I get to use my ships the way I want more or less. I can’t even do that anymore, I’ve had to change time and time again for better or worse, and still you think I have someplace I need to be, your blasted place.
  3. Ranked Battles

    With re to Ranked battles in World of Warships, while its great that a team that wins gets a star, its almost like pure luck to be given a star (50/50 chance) and not really based on skill of the individual player, but more or less if the team wins or not. You can have a very bad player who sails in reverse be lucky enough to advance to Rank #1 if they were lucky enough to be in a winning team each time for example, yet say a master of naval skill be unlucky enough to be on the losing team all the time and not win a Rank star. Now this is not the case now, but only an example of the extremes. What we need is more of a calculation on the player skills in game for more points on individual accomplishments and rank, and of course, if you win will be a bonus. If you sink, not so good. If you survive, good. Sink enemies, spot enemies, capture areas, all good. Number of hits, damage done, etc. Think this will be a better overall Rank system, than a 50/50 chance system based on a mix and match of good and not so good players as its really the luck of the draw when you look at it. Realized this after a few games and people complaining that they were losing ranks, yet doing well in battle. Could be sore losers too, but I think I have a point overall. Next ranked battles should be more individual based for ranks, and not entirely based on team play. Thank you. Admiral Maddog has barked.
  4. I read the post complaining about poor players in the ranked battles. The player who topped the damage & XP charts for the team cause 2 teammates to get sunk and saved a enemy from being deleted early in the game. There is a lot more to being a good player than good stats.
  5. I just wanted to say thanks to everyone who I've played with in ranked so far. There's been almost no saltiness, far less than random battles, and the quality of play is better than random battles. All the DDs scout, all the cruisers support, and BBs push up. There are exceptions, of course, but for the most part everyone is playing their best. Maybe I've just been lucky in teammates this weekend, but its been a very good experience so far. Making me a better player, too.
  6. Hello Captains! With the new Patch of 0.7.4, Ranked Battles will be coming. Tier 8 for the first several ranks, then Tier X for Ranks 10 and up. So my question is what ships will you be using in Ranked, and why? What has served you well in the past and what do you anticipate the new meta being? Let's hear your thoughts! (NOTE: If you don't care about Ranked Battles, this ain't the thread for you. Please move along!)
  7. Procuro dicas de algum "Jolly Rogers" que queira ajudar a chegar no tão cobiçado Rank 1. Já participei de várias temporadas, mas sempre acabo desistindo, pois se torna muito frustrante ter jogadores não tão comprometidos no meu time, que sempre puxam pra baixo o desempenho. O melhor que já cheguei foi ao "rank 4". Vou tentar de novo kkkkk pois sou brasileiro e não desisto nunca Qual embarcação vocês pretendem usar? alguma dica especial?
  8. Abandon Ship

    Abandon Ship a new clan that's current core were all in typhoon league last season and we all got our Stalingrad flags. We are looking to add all types of players to increase our clan size. If you enjoy clan battles and ranked battles then this could be the home for you. We also do lots of divisions and random battles. Our clan battle schedule is 7:00- 10:00 Wed, Sat, and Sun. If this is a good schedule for you and would be interested in participating in next seasons clan battles drop me a line or submit an app in game.
  9. Ranked Edition, Spare Us

    Really, WG? You want to encourage players to buy a T8 premium, stick a 6-point commander on it, and take that into ranked? I may sit the whole thing out! This doesn't improve the game in any way. Instead, it encourages unprepared players to buy their new shiny, and plunge into ranked battles. Thanks, not!
  10. Suggestion towards Ranked Battles

    I already suggested this in a different topic, but want to elaborate. The change I propose is that you are required to select three ships, instead of one. When entering the battle you will see the ship you are going to use. Should it even be three different ships or classes? Pro´s Slight increase of entrance level. More variation in playstyle per player. Less likely to meet a beginner in the same ship the whole time (eg: CV) Con's Will take longer for non premium beginners to enter a this type of battle mode with rewards. More variation in playstyle per player. You will not be able to play your favourite ship the whole time. Shoot guys!
  11. Yay Rank 1

    \o/ thanks to everyone who had to put up with me being an popoto and specially @m373x for upgrading my boat and being there for the last star <3 will return the favour when I can
  12. Good tier 8 Ranked Ships?

    Wondering what ships are having the best Success Rates in Ranked tier 8? I have been using full secondary Spec Bismarck and had good WR in until getting stalled out at Rank 10-9 and also doing good scores in Amagi. Putting up nice 100k+ damage score in them pretty consistently and still not getting anywhere since the teams keep melting and it's hard for a BB to keep all the caps locked down. Any ideas? Wondering if any another ship would have better results?
  13. Hey All - Quick PSA - w/ all the attention to the 6.15 Patch Notes annoucement focusing on the new Campaigns - just want to make sure 2 important items buried in the notes don't get missed. The next Ranked Battle Season starts on Dec 22 using T8 ships. If you're interested in the next Ranked Battle season - not much time to train or move Captains into your T8 ships. The Missouri will be removed as the FXP ship in the Feb timeframe (per the notes) and replaced by another T9 Ship - likely the Musashi (based on other mined WG sources). If anyone wants this ship, you have approx. 2 more months to get it and its insane Silver earning abilities. To my knowledge, no info is yet available whether the new replacement T9 will have the same earning capabilities, but this is a heads up, just in case WG decides to change the economics of the replacement ship.
  14. Player rating

    I missed being able to play a lot of Ranked due to work commitments. Recently, having missed a few weeks, played ok, finished mid field and found I had received one or two negative scores i.e my Service Record Karma score went down. Got back into it and had some really good games, Karma did not change. Had an exceptional game 220k damage - Karma +3. Next few games finished 3 - 5 place and Karma -3, What the.... So - a theory, why not base performance and ratings not on someone else opinion on how they think you should play, but on the impact you have on a game [Damage Dealt] with respect to your ships XP, CAPing, Spotting and Aircraft destroyed [I strongly believe that destroying Aircraft has a significant effect on a game]. Example [Simple] - ship has 50k health, does 50k damage, no CAP/Spot/Aircraft = zero change. does 100k damage = +1 [i.e 100%] does 25k damage = -0.5 [i.e 50%] Since the game MM bases the teams on a number of hit points per team as one of the criteria. Thought? Developers?? Smooth Sailing!
  15. So I have a question about ranked. Now, really I have to ask, because I feel like I'm missing something. So, playing ranked every couple of battles I get a cruiser on my team that goes off goldfish hunting. By that I mean they take off at flank speed for the edge of MAP and turn in circles or something. Is this some tactic to preserve their ships HP until they can finish off damaged ships? Are they just bot type morons or what? Mostly I've been seeing DD drivers doing their best, most get in lay smoke, ambush and other dastardly things. point is most DDs I see are trying. Battleships are half and half, some want nothing more that to hear their guns go off, and that's about all they do. others seem to really want to smack something in the face with their secondaries, and then dry hump the wreck, needless to say I like having the tanking bb drivers on the team. But then it's cruisers. Now to be fair I love playing a cruiser, but it seems like 70% or so of cruiser drivers in ranked just wander about like they don't know what button makes the guns fire. some drive in circles and spam HE at empty ocean, some run to the back of the map and hide, some hide for first half of battle and then come out to finish off stragglers. Is this some sort of tactic to preserve their ship and hope to decide the game in their favor? it dosent seem to work well. I've been in two ranked battles where out of nowhere a full health cruiser suddenly rejoins the battle and manages to get one of the last two kills after doing nothing all game. Now I know there will always be the random AFK jerks, and this is not that. these ships are moving, hiding and running away, only to sometimes rejoin fight near the end when the match is already decided. Apart from that I've seen some pretty great Destryoer players, and people don't seem to AFK destroyers. granted some just get sunk quick, but they are playing. I've also seen a few battleships do the same thing as the goldfish hunting cruisers, but with their much larger detection range they don't fair as well. so why do people try and hide for half the battle? Anyway I did not know if other people have noticed this as well. Maybe I'm just not seeing why a ship is moving where it is and being overly critical? Or is there some protactic I'm not aware of (likely) that calls for someone to preserve their ship for as long as possible? please enlighten me.
  16. Hi, My ranked battles going same as this topic. How about you capts? I love to listen to this song during ranked seasons lol
  17. So today I was playing to try and get from level 11 to 10 in ranked, it took me a long time. I was finally able to make it to rank 10. But then when I exited the post battle results screen it said that I was still rank 11. I only play one battle at a time and play through the whole battle even if I die. So there should have been nothing that would have caused me to de-rank. It took me all day to get to rank 10 and to be thrown back like that is very frustrating. How could this happen?!
  18. Myths of Ranked

    Here are some myths of ranked battles that I have collected this season. Some from what people say on the forums and some from how people play in ranked : Higher ranked players are better than lower ranked player. The primary goal of the game is to sink the enemy ships. The Cleveland citadel is hard to hit. The Nürnberg is a viable ship to play in ranked. Bringing stock ships or untrained captains is not griefing your teammates. If I just reach the next league I will have left all the potatoes behind. Once you are in smoke you are safe - Seen this so often, people forget to move a little or wait too long to smoke up and still die because shells or torpedoes found their mark even through the smoke. I just bought a tier 6 premium ship, I am totally ready for ranked. Torpedoes dont deal friendly damage. There is no need to mount modules on the ships, it does not really make that much of a difference. If DDs dont get support from their team they cant dodge the torpedoes. - Common excuse from the DD that ate a torpedo in his smoke on the cap at the beginning of the game. Especially the ones that dont understand that BBs at tier 6 are slow. Strike CV is a viable tactic. Ranked players learn from their mistakes. Leaving your team to chase down an enemy CV is a viable tactic. The map boundaries need to be regularly inspected to prevent ships from other maps finding their way into your game. Torpedoes just keep going until they hit something. People that play rank have some understanding of the game and how to win. Torpedoes cannot penetrate smoke. Camo and premium consumables are too expensive to run in ranked. My detection range is not an important thing to know. Dunkerque is a viable BB. IJN DDs cant use their guns. Your team mates actually desire to win the game. Hydro secondary spec Clevelands are viable targets for CVs. Finally the biggest false fact people try to pass off about ranked: Ranked is a competitive game mode - This is the real kicker I have seen this a lot recently, people argue that ranked is competitive because teams cant be stacked by divisions or other reasons. If it was actually competitive players would hit a ceiling where they can no longer progress because they hit their skill limit and the players above them would be more skilled. Instead in ranked if you hit the battle button enough times you can still rank out even if you win less than half the time. So players with below 50% win rates can somehow reach rank 1 even though they were not competitive in game like a player from last season who ranked out with a 46% win rate (over 900 battles were required). In ranked quantity has a quality all its own.
  19. Out of curiosity I just ran the numbers looking into the HE performance of every Tier 6 cruiser. In consideration of the fact that some cruises are forced to use IFHE while others are not, I separately calculated fires per minute for both the base fire chance of every ship, as well the base fire chance + DE and both fire flags. The calculation of DPM is fairly self explanatory. I calculated the broadside fire chance using the formula: BF= 1- (1 - F (0.7669))^n Where.. F = the individual shell fire chance N = number of guns in a broadside 0.7669 = Tier 6 fire resistance coefficient I then calculated fires per minute by multiplying the broadside fire chance by the number of broadsides each ship is capable of firing per minute. *Note: All data, including the fire resistance coefficient and broadside fire chance equation, was gathered from the Wiki. Base Fire Chance HE DPM Broadisde Fire Fires per Minute Aoba 108,900 56.75% 3.121184386 Cleveland* 198,000 68.61% 5.145326289 Nürnberg 153,000 43.44% 4.343799027 Spee 57,600 63.18% 1.895279541 Budyonny* 148,500 58.06% 4.64461707 Molotov 108,000 61.14% 2.934739415 Perth* 134,400 43.57% 3.485506157 Aosta* 134,400 35.69% 2.855026728 La Galissonnière* 132,660 58.06% 3.889866796 De Grasse* 146,520 58.06% 4.29627079 *Edit: All ships that I consider to be run optimally with IFHE are marked with an *asterisk* DE + flags HE DPM Broadisde Fire Fires per Minute Aoba 108,900 65.13% 3.582292946 Cleveland* 198,000 76.92% 5.76948885 Nürnberg 153,000 54.76% 5.475953303 Spee 57,600 70.49% 2.114714453 Budyonny* 148,500 66.71% 5.33667086 Molotov 108,000 71.56% 3.434667671 Perth* 134,400 53.81% 4.304530393 Aosta* 134,400 47.18% 3.774575939 LaGalissonnière* 132,660 66.71% 4.469461845 De Grasse* 146,520 66.71% 4.936420545 *Edit: All ships that I consider to be run optimally with IFHE are marked with an *asterisk* Some notable stand outs: Nurnberg, Molotov. The Nurnberg surprisingly enough has the 2nd best HE DPM of any ship in her tier, and thanks to her special HE pen bonus she also has the highest fires per minute when all ships are run in their optimal configurations as she does not need to take IFHE. The Molotov has the 2nd worst DPM in her tier, only ahead of the Spee, and when all ships are run in optimal configurations she has the third worst fires per minute, only ahead of the Spee and Aosta. Despite her much vaunted the guns, the Molotov has incredibly subpar HE performance.
  20. This anomaly has happened numerous and repeated times precisely at the hand-off from the ranked battles queue to loading into the battle. When it happens I get a message that says something to the effect of 'due to inactivity'. There has been no deviations in the way it happens - it's precisely the same every time. I have to log back into the game which then brings me into the battle. Fortunately, I have good gear with SSD and a fast ISP so I get back in fast but it's disruptive and annoying regardless. I've completely restarted hoping to resolve the matter but it just happened again. Submitting a ticket - not that I expect it will help much or in a timely way. Is anyone else seeing this issue?
  21. Ranked Battles

    Hi Why do not Enable Range Battles with Division? Many of us are dissatisfied with the players who touch us in luck. With the formation of the Division you could choose who to play with; And not lose games by mistakes of others and vice versa. Many players of your team (that you do not know) before the lost; They only make a report; Which is not always fair I would appreciate a response. And thank you very much
  22. Perth in Ranked

    Well, so far Perth seems to be working well for me. I had to make a couple of adjustments: 1. Switch IFHE for for Superintendent and expert loader.Smoke mod 1 ain't enough in Ranked. Rd tm will cheerfully delete a Perth if it gets spotted. Being able to smoke more frequently helps. 2. Making like a big DD. Numerous times I have to cap because some DD drivers are too tentative to do it. So i have to be more aggressive than normal. Plus it seems dd's are more aggressive if there is someone close by.
  23. I understand it's frustrating to lose a game. We have all had bad games. Some of us have kids and lives and wives that distract ya while we are playing. Don't be that guy who is a jerk because someone makes a mistake or doesn't do what you say. The only way to grow the community and have more people enjoy ranked battles is to have fun. This isn't a job for the average player so please be kind to your teammates and try to give them tips and pointers you have learned rather than berate them because you lost.
  24. When is the next Ranked Battles season starting? I have high enough ships now to participate in Ranked and would very much like to have a Jolly Roger Flag flying over my ships as soon as possible lol.