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


Forums

  • World of Warships - News and Information
    • News And Announcements
    • Updates and PTS
    • Developer's Corner
    • Player Gatherings and Events
    • Community Volunteer Programs
  • Feedback and Support
    • Game Support and Bug Reporting
    • Player Feature and Gameplay Suggestions
    • Game Guides and Tutorials
  • General WoWs Discussion
    • General Game Discussion
    • Game Guides and Tutorials
    • Discussions about Warships
    • Player Modifications
  • Off Topic
    • Historical Discussions and Studies
    • Off-Topic
  • International Forums
    • Foro en Español
    • Fórum Brasileiro
  • Master Archive
    • The Pigeon's Nest
    • Closed Beta Test Archive
    • Alpha Test Archive
    • For Development and Publisher Only
    • QA AUTO
    • Contests and Community Events
    • Super Test
    • Newcomer's Forum
    • Contest Entries
    • Questions and Answers
    • Contest Entries
    • New Captains
    • Guías y Estrategias
    • Task Force 58
    • Livestream Ideas and Feedback
    • Árboles Tecnológicos
    • Fan Art and Community Creations
    • Community Created Events and Contests
    • Community Staging Ground
    • Forum Reorg 2.0 Archive
    • Noticias y Anuncios

Find results in...

Find results that contain...


Date Created

  • Start

    End


Last Updated

  • Start

    End


Filter by number of...

Joined

  • Start

    End


Group


Discord


Twitter


Website URL


Instagram


YouTube


Twitch


Skype


Location


Interests

Found 14 results

  1. Can someone explain to me how the scoring works in ranked battles? How does 145k damage, 2 ships destroyed, and 2 devastating strike achievements end up being ranked lower than 1 ship destroyed and no achievements? Not sure what more I need to do to save my star.
  2. Hi Wargaming... I have a suggestion. I believe it would be very cool if there was a combat mission available for ranked seasons: Play 100 battles of ranked or Achieve rank 1 The reward could be 7 days premium and/or doubloons or even a permanent camo for whatever tier the ranked season is played and it could be linked to any ship. I think such a reward would be nice considering the frustration players encounter and how many players avoid ranked altogether because of it. With such a reward people might decide to participate more. Oh... and.... -Remove the star saves (more incentive for winning over saving yourself) -Make rank 5 irrevocable (reduce the sheer aggravation of garbage teams) Thanks for reading.
  3. franz_von_goltz

    Ranked vs Random

    Goltzstadt finds Ranked more interesting than Random, essentially because there is much more team playing, winning the battle is the reward rather than farming damage. Why there are no Ranked battles permanently, different tiers, etc I can understand Clan battles happening during specific hours, but Ranked? No up or down tiers, more team play, etc Could be monthly, 2 different tiers, one odd, one pair (CVs and SSs, no CVs and no SSs).
  4. AdmiralOthuyeg

    Ranking out party, join in.

    The title says it. This is the thread where you can have cake and party when you rank out. Also, name your main ship. For me it was the Shinonome.
  5. From what I know of how XP is calculated (based on anecdotal information and the, "How It Works" video about XP) it seems that Wargaming has a (mostly) symmetrical formula when calculating XP earned in a battle. (There is some difference by ship type, but only for potential damage, spotting ships and damage upon spotting.) This system is generally fair and seems fairly evenly distributed during normal gameplay. But during ranked battles, I've noticed what seems to be a significantly higher number of battleships saving a star; that is, being the ship that gains the most XP on a losing team and thereby being the only ship on the team to not lose a star during a loss. Conversely, I almost never see a destroyer saving a star. It seems to me that destroyers are tasked with capturing bases and spotting ships & torpedoes. A good DD will do these things for his team. But often the team will lose anyway, and because the DD did not "do the most damage" it's not really in contention to save a star. I don't have statistics on this, obviously. But I'd like to suggest to Wargaming that they review their data. I would be surprised if the data did not support the idea that BBs disproportionately save stars and DDs disproportionately fail to save stars. And assuming that I'm right (which I very well might not be) I suggest that an XP system that is almost entirely specific to a ship class might be the better way to go. (In place of the existing one that is almost entirely symmetrical among the different ship classes, but with a little tweaking by class.) Thanks.
  6. okay so this is the season of ranked battles where Tier 10 comes in. Rentals as well. I am here to mention some ideas, mainly revolving around rank progression. Now we get to use amazing ships for ranked which is great, I love tier 10. What I don't like is the fact that people who've played very little t8 matches get access to a t10 ship in ranked battles. Those who do have t8 are 89% more likely to cost us the match and I have over 50 matches that will prove that. People at t8 need more time to learn their ships before getting to access t10 ships. They don't know armor angels or citadel points and are often times the first to die on team. Typically they end up having a key ship that we really need to win. Second issue I've noticed is people getting upset at the people with the rental ships, and those people will refuse to participate or help any teammates in the match because of someone they dont like on their team. This second issue shall be described as intentionally throwing the match out of spite. Now on to what should be done if you wont take out the rentals. Ranks 18,17,16 you can win or lose rank. each of those should have 3 starts. Rank 15 should be a rank you cannot lose. Ranks 14,13,12 and 11 should be ranks that you can win or lose Rank 10 should be a rank you cannot lose, and with rank ten and beyond you must achieve 5 stars. Ranks 9,8,7,6, should all be ranks you can win or lose, and they should also have 5 stars each. Rank 5 should be a rank you cannot lose. and you should have to achieve 4 stars Rank 4 is a rank you can lose, Achieve 4 stars to rank up. Rank 3 should be a rank you cannot lose but you must achieve 3 stars to rank up. Rank 2 should be a rank you can lose but you must achieve 3 stars to rank up. Rank 1 should be left as is. Cannot lose it but you should make them win 2 more battles to achieve the prize just to keep it interesting. I personally think this would be a much better ranking system, that would reduce the stress and anger among players in ranked, and would hopefully increase participation I also think there needs to be a penalty for people who refuse to participate in ranked battles of course proof should be provided to a direct wargaming ticket but after 3 ticket submission about a player not participating intentionally, just to cost the round out of spite. A player should be restricted from ranked battles for 24 hours. Reason, if they are intentionally costing people their match and their rank, they are being detrimental to the game and ruining the experience that people are trying to enjoy. They are being a burden and causing stress to those around them. I truly enjoy this game, I like the tactics and strategy it takes to play this game right. I Love ranked battles as well, minus the carrier aspect.( dont think carriers have a place in ranked with the size of the teams we have ) but people need to start working together instead of being selfish. Ranked battles is a mode were people should want to work together and actually be a team. Those who do not want to do that should not play ranked. If they are a person that ruins matches they should be restricted from them for 24 hours, if they continue to repeatedly do this give them a 3 day ban and if they still do it after that give them a season ban so they stop messing with people. I write this because, I am a working class man, I work hard and when i come home I wanna sit down and do somethign I enjoy doing, but when I log in all I have are people swearing at me, cutting me down adn talking crap when we are in a battle and im asking for help defending a base. Meanwhile the teammate that is talking trash and cutting me down is dead stop 15 km away sitting on the edge of the map behind an island refusing to fire. I just would really like for people to grow up a little bit and stop being selfish. We are all trying to achieve those prizes in ranked, if someone is trying to intentionally ruin everything, why do they continue to be allowed to act in such a way. My time is precious, when I log in and play I can understand having a few losses and a few wins, but to lose 20 matches in a row because you keep getting the same 2 people on your team that are hating on eachother and refuse to help well that blows our ranks right out the window and makes it so we will never achieve the rank that we deserve to reach. Wargaming please change the rank systems so we can at least keep our stars at higher ranks, or issue bans/restrictions to those who intentionally compromise matches.
  7. Rank Battle Issues – No One Wants to Talk About Rank Battles is advertised as the Best Players and Best Boats battle it out to see who is “Top Dog”. Well Can anyone honestly say that's what is happening this season? Lets review the issues and the facts. Issues - 1 “Rental Ship”. Why its bad. In order to get a tier 10 Battleship, I had to grind my BB up to level 10. That means I know the strength and weakness of not only my but the other ships class/nationalities and their characteristics. Those that don't are a terrible disadvantage. It got so bad teams were regularly counting who had the most rentals, as it generally resulted in a loss. 2 Match Maker(MM) is out of control. I run a large fleet and have a variety of top tier ships and top tier commanders. In its zeal to make every game balanced even in ranked, it makes decision based on players ability(win percentages, total battles played, etc), ships ability(upgrades, consumables, and Commander skill points allocated). Thru the ability of rating each ship mathematically and the power of averaging, the MM Algorithm can theoretically balances the teams out. In Practical Use/Application not so much. Ranks is not Random Battles(where WoWs can place house Botz in here or there and get away with it).This can be proven by running a simple test of 10 matches. Run the same ship with a 10 pnt commander vs. a 19 pnt commander and notice the quality of team mates you are paired up with. You want to win don't run high level commander. MM will neutralize your advantages in the name of Fairness. 3 Game Balance. CVs are out of control. Since the Great CV Nerf of v8.x all in the name of FPS, the balance is off the scales. The primary reason the lack of Fleet Fighter Cap Role, which is a Design Error and a game flaw of Moronic Proportions. After all why do CVs carry fighters? For Rockets … LOL. 4 Game Balance . DDs When I read the Ships overview for DDs, it say one of there roles is to smoke the fleet. Why smoke has been Nerfed to the point where its virtually ineffective. No point in smoking the BBs and CAs for the most part are not much better. 5 Economics at Tier 10 in Ranks and Random are Broke. If you score 1,400 plus on a winning team how the hell do you loose 60k in credits in a ranked match. I know what I am seeing as I have 2.3k Ranked Battles and over 13k Random Battles under my belt. BTW the patch I wear indicates that I have been around since the Beta version of World of Warships. In short I know what I am seeing.
  8. Some of us don't care to participate in ranked battles, so why must our port carousel be cluttered by boats we don't want and won't use? THIS IS THE PERFECT EXAMPLE OF A PERTINENT USE OF THE "PARTICIPATE" BUTTON ON THE WEB SITE! Please.
  9. The main reason I liked ranked battles is that fact you were playing specifically with other tier 5 opponents. Match maker was at it's best. The second reason I like the mini ranked battles is that rank 1 was obtainable by all players, and required only a reasonable amount of our time to achieve. Short and sweet, then it is over after you reached rank 1, but why did the ranked battles end after hitting ranked 1? The ranked battles should have continued to include an all inclusive only "rank 1 players" battles. Match Maker couldn't get much better than that. No loss or gain of rank, just a good ole time playing against players with equal ships and with less disparity of player's skills.
  10. Okay, sorry, I do have to rant a bit about this ranked season. We've all (assuming you play ranked) have had ranked issues in the past. Bad matchmaking, terrible teammates, just an off day. It happens. But this season has truly been terrible. I've played ranked before in the past, though not very seriously. Usually I've gotten up to rank 9-8 and I then I stop. But since this is/was going to be the last season to get the Jolly Roger Flag, I thought it was high time I ranked out. Oh boy, was I wrong. At first ranking out was the normal grind, loose a few battles, win a few, go up a rank, etc. But after I entered the 10-1 rank range, it just got worse. Every battle I would see the same people making the same mistakes and throwing the match. Obviously there's going to be a few bad games and a few bad people. However I kept getting the same people who just did not know how to do well every single match. It gets fairly disheartening when you open up the team list screen at the start of a match and "oh boy, there's that Henri again who likes to rush up the middle of the map and broadside a Des Moines at 7km again!" It's to the point that if I'm not doing 200k dmg, taking out 3 enemy ships, and capping twice, my team is guaranteed to lose. I'm an alright player, but that kind of win I can maybe only do every 5/10 matches. And if I do manage to carry the team to victory, all I get is 1 star. Which I'm going to lose the next match beacuse "Oh look the Henri is back. Well guess we lose!" Furthermore, if I just do the best I can, and there's someone who's either better than me or spent the entire match camping at the back farming damage, I'm coming in second and still losing that star. The psychological toll of constantly getting the same terrible teammates and getting nothing accomplished/losing all the work you've put in is downright awful. I am really questioning whether or not I want to continue playing WOWS after this (and I definitely wont be ranking out this season. :/ no more Jolly Roger flag). Honestly I don't think I want to continue playing anymore, in spite of all the work I've put in. So the question remains, why do these people keep staying high up in ranked? They don't know what they're doing so they should be dropping ranks beacuse their team keeps failing beacuse of them right? Unfortunately, it seems that carrying teams only exacerbates the issue of ranked. People want to win so they dont lose a star so they fight hard to carry their team. However, beacuse those players who do not know what they are doing are winning if they get teams that will carry them, and if happenstance sides in their favor, they'll gradually keep moving up even if they aren't learning anything. ---------- So is there any good fix? Well the clear answer is to fix how stars are distributed. If players who are doing well get more stars they won't be as impacted by bad teamwork/teams. Similarly, players who aren't contributing to the team should be getting some form of penalty so their impact on future teams is reduced. Currently, each battle has a net gain of 1 star towards the total stars available within a ranked season (Winning team gains 7 stars, losing team loses 6 stars), so I'll be using that as a basis for star distribution. Winning Team Star Gain Reason Top Exp Earner 2 Stars Contributed the most to the team (probably). 2nd 1 Star Won 3rd 1 Star Won 4th 1 Star Won 5th 1 Star Won 6th 1 Star Won 7th 0 Stars Contributed the least (probably) Losing Team Star Gain Reason Top Exp Earner 1 Star Contributed the most to the team. 2nd 0 Stars Did not win, but tried fairly hard. 3rd -1 Star Lost 4th -1 Star Lost 5th -1 Star Lost 6th -1 Star Lost 7th -2 Stars Contributed the least to the team. This example shift changes the net gain of stars to 2 (Winning team gains 7, Losing team loses 5). It's a "radical" shift, but it would go a long way to correcting some ranked issues. For the wining team, the top exp earner who presumably contributed the most to the teams success now gains two stars. People who work hard on their wins rank out slightly faster, and are less likely to be impacted by teammates who need to go brush up a bit. Similarly, the bottom exp earner gains no stars beacuse they contributed the least to the teams win. They won't be penalized because they didn't contribute to the teams failure, but they will need to try harder/gain new skills if they want to succeed further. For the losing team, the top exp earner still gains 1 star. They tried the hardest, but in spite of their effort they did not win. Their loss is (presumably) not their fault, but beacuse they gave it their all they will be rewarded. Conversely, the person who was the bottom exp earner will lose 2 stars. They contributed to their teams failure and hurt their teammates. Hence, their punishment will be more drastic than everyone else. These individuals will be removed from ranks that do not fit their skill level more quickly, which will allow for few games decided by "who gets that guy again". Furthermore, you'll notice that for the losing team the 2nd exp earner does not lose a star. Generally the 2nd exp earner on an enemy team either did their job as it entailed or excelled slightly. Ideally this change should reduce the penalty for people who only did what they were supposed to do. -------- So let me know what you all think. Do you think these changes would/could improve ranked gameplay? Do you think they should be made more/less drastic? Do you think anything else should be changed about ranked? Do you think you should donate your Jolly Roger flag to Blizz because he won't be getting one ever again (;-;)?
  11. USSPC_1264

    Ranked level 15

    I just got to level 15 in ranked for this season using my Cleveland, But now I need a level ten ship does this mean that this is as far as I can go for this season?
  12. I'm sure this was discussed several times before, but i have a different suggestion (or not): - Stars for the losing team: all the players lose one star. No matter what they did, the amount of XP or anything else. - Stars for the winning team: all players gain one star, less the first place in XP, this player will receive two stars instead. It keeps the star rewarding simple for everyone and also the star rewarding balance keeps positive. Sure, sure there aren't perfect solutions and players will find ways to abuse the mechanic, like: The team is about to win, the surviving players just need to keep their concealment, instead they rush the enemy to farm damage with the aim to get in first and 2 stars and instead get sunk trying that, then resulting in a defeat. Making everyone in the team lose one star. But still, it's a better alternative than not letting the first place in the losing team keep his star just because he was farming damage from safety while the other players were tanking and spotting and couldn't do more because they were lacking another ship in the front lines. Any suggestions or comments?
  13. Following todays (aug. 29. 2018) server maintenance action, several ranked battle results were not recorded. I even tried re-booting the game. did not correct the issue. Ship returns to harbor, but game results are not displayed, and notification List is not updated.
  14. I am not a very good DD player but I have tier 8 DDs and decided to give ranked another try. A few win/lose observations. Hey DD cap X and spot then help at Y. DD does so Caps X spots looks to Y and finds 5 friendlies fleeing 2 enemy and 2 friendlies far off vs 5 enemy at Z turn run and get sunk and all 7 crying for DD help. Loser move. Winner move though if enemy does that unless of course 2 or 3 friendlies chase them and get slaughtered! Hey DD cap X we will back you up. DD caps X Enemy is pushing X and 6 friendlies have scattered like roaches avoiding contact and staying away from caps X Y and Z. Loser move. Winner move if enemy does it. Then of course friendlies pursue and get slaughtered while demanding DD cap X Y and Z. Wake up guys stay together, focus enemy down 1 by 1 and Cap instead of chasing runners. Got 2 caps Defend them don't go for 3 and don't chase runners focus fire on them 1 at a time!
×