2 suggested changes...one small, and one...?

[desmo_2]

My first suggestion is a small detail.  On the team list screens, can the player section be widened to allow more of the players' names to be visible?  Especially now with clan tags showing up frequently, I often only see the first 4-6 letters of a player's name.  It would be nice to be able to see more, and it doesn't seem that would be too difficult to fix.

 

My second suggestion...hold on to your hats:

What if we started Ranked off at Tier 5?   The second Tier progression could still be Tier 7 or 8. 

Tier 5 gets shafted by current match making.  In the first levels of Ranked, however, all you would be facing would be other Tier 5's.  There are some great ships there, and it might be nice for people to have some incentive to break them out of mothballs and have some fun at that Tier again.

 

*breathes*  Okay, fire away. 

[LubzinNJ]

I had a similar thought about T5 Ranked. If for no other reason than I have some T5s I'd love to play but not when I'm bottom tier every time.

[Terrible_Turtle]

T5 Ranked?

 

 

*Heavy breathing*

 

[IceSerpen7]

T5 ranked? Let me ask the crew of my Gremy if they're up for it...

 

[CAPTMUDDXX]

ranked should be for all tiers so all can participate and be rewarded Rank out in tier 1 then try tier 2 and so on or just mix and match to see where you do the best

[scruffycavetroll]

T5 Ranked?

 

 

*Heavy breathing*

 

 

i was thinking the same thing...minus the devils animal. 

[Macabe]

You're going to have matches of nothing but gremy.

[scruffycavetroll]

You're going to have matches of nothing but gremy.

 

pure balance. 

 

maybe he is on to something? 

[poeticmotion]

ranked should be for all tiers so all can participate and be rewarded Rank out in tier 1 then try tier 2 and so on or just mix and match to see where you do the best

 

Can we not have just one [edited]competitive mode? no, not all need to participate. If you're so new to the game that you don't have any tier 5 or 6 ships, you don't need to be in ranked. 

 

I mean, randoms drive me nuts because of how many potatoes there are, but I accept it. Ranked gets its share of potatoes since there are potatoes at every tier, but ffs let us have this one mode for competitive play at least to the extent of forcing people to have a t5 or t6 ship. Even a new player can get a t5 ship in a day and a t6 in a couple days if they grind hard enough, for that matter.

[RoundsDownRange]

Well I am at a point I don’t care what tier the battles are at, five would be nice, but until it’s truly ranked and not the current winning and losing team format they use I will not return to ranked battles.

Tired of players riding the coat tails of other team mates and doing nothing to help the team but advancing because the team they were on won.

 

It should be one screen at the end of the with the ship that earn/did the most at the top and the guy who did nothing at the bottom, with the top 7 advancing, 8 and 9 not gaining or losing a star and 10 to the end losing a star regardless of which team they are on. 

 

That is how “ranked” battles should be scored. 

 

[HazardDrake]

Yea. It would be nice to actually be able to read a persons entire username. Especially when my monitor has plenty of space to display it.

[IceSerpen7]

Well I am at a point I don’t care what tier the battles are at, five would be nice, but until it’s truly ranked and not the current winning and losing team format they use I will not return to ranked battles.

Tired of players riding the coat tails of other team mates and doing nothing to help the team but advancing because the team they were on won.

 

It should be one screen at the end of the with the ship that earn/did the most at the top and the guy who did nothing at the bottom, with the top 7 advancing, 8 and 9 not gaining or losing a star and 10 to the end losing a star regardless of which team they are on. 

 

That is how “ranked” battles should be scored. 

 

 

This is precisely why WG doesn't listen to us - how you've managed to not realize that scoring by team position instead of absolute value is a Very Bad Idea ™ and not realize that overall scoring without splitting between teams will be abused to no end on top of that is simply mind boggling.

 

 

[DoomStomper]

Strongly agree with the first point, and it's far from the first time it's been suggested.  Honestly, I'm surprised that an optional checkbox to widen the team panels wasn't added to the settings long ago.

 

Don't care one way or the other about Ranked.  With that in mind, I say make every season start at T1, working up through the tiers as your rank increases, concluding with success in a T10 ship being the only way to achieve Rank 1.  Would be amusing to watch from the sidelines at least... 

[Aduial]

You're going to have matches of nothing but gremy.

 

And then you'll have me in my Furutaka, simply because I have nothing better to play at T5. 

[scruffycavetroll]

 

And then you'll have me in my Furutaka, simply because I have nothing better to play at T5. 

 

[poeticmotion]

Well I am at a point I don’t care what tier the battles are at, five would be nice, but until it’s truly ranked and not the current winning and losing team format they use I will not return to ranked battles.

Tired of players riding the coat tails of other team mates and doing nothing to help the team but advancing because the team they were on won.

It should be one screen at the end of the with the ship that earn/did the most at the top and the guy who did nothing at the bottom, with the top 7 advancing, 8 and 9 not gaining or losing a star and 10 to the end losing a star regardless of which team they are on. 

That is how “ranked” battles should be scored. 

 

LOLno. Then people will abandon any semblance of team play and [edited]their teammates over to get a higher score.  This is a terrible idea and you should be ashamed of all the life choices that led to you becoming the allegedly human being you are today. 

 

Hyperbole aside, this really is terrible. They already changed it so that the top scorer on the losing team does not lose a star. I think that change was reasonable and warranted. I can even see an argument that someone on the winning team who doesn't contribute (maybe if the bottom scorer has less than half the xp of the second-lowest score, or a metric like that) shouldn't gain a star. But the system you outline would make me not play ranked battles, so it's a wash as to your "I won't play ranked battles until this happens" ultimatum. So please, keep sitting ranked battles out, as I don't think I want you as a teammate anyway. 

[Captain_Dilbert]

My 19 pt Fujin captain would gladly participate in T5 ranked battles.  BTW, (and this is not a troll post) why is the the Gremyashchy considered such a great ship.  I looked at her vs the Nicholas and they seemed fairly comparable (Nicholas better ROF, 4x3 torps vs 2x3 torps, granted shorter range though)? 

[TheKrimzonDemon]

My 19 pt Fujin captain would gladly participate in T5 ranked battles.  BTW, (and this is not a troll post) why is the the Gremyashchy considered such a great ship.  I looked at her vs the Nicholas and they seemed fairly comparable (Nicholas better ROF, 4x3 torps vs 2x3 torps, granted shorter range though)? 

 

I have no idea why. I can take or leave Gremy. All she is, is a premium Gnevny with worse turrets and better torp range.

[AphelionMarauder]

Personal opinion: Ranked should start at 3 and you progress up 3 ladders per each tier up to tier 10. Would make the tier 10 ranked battle players a lot more prestigious. 

 

But I guess that's just me.

[HazardDrake]

My 19 pt Fujin captain would gladly participate in T5 ranked battles.  BTW, (and this is not a troll post) why is the the Gremyashchy considered such a great ship.  I looked at her vs the Nicholas and they seemed fairly comparable (Nicholas better ROF, 4x3 torps vs 2x3 torps, granted shorter range though)? 

Originally. It was considered the worst of the pre-order ships. However it now has several advantages.

 

Good stealth torp ability. Nicholas can't stealth torp.

Flatter arcs than the Nicholas. (This is the major difference.)

Better HE shells.

Good AP

Non-nerfed stealth fire ability vs other VMF DD.

[Fodder4U]

Waiting for T10 ranked myself.

[RoundsDownRange]

 

This is precisely why WG doesn't listen to us - how you've managed to not realize that scoring by team position instead of absolute value is a Very Bad Idea ™ and not realize that overall scoring without splitting between teams will be abused to no end on top of that is simply mind boggling.

 

 

Then please explain it to me so I can understand.

 

 

LOLno. Then people will abandon any semblance of team play and [edited]their teammates over to get a higher score.  This is a terrible idea and you should be ashamed of all the life choices that led to you becoming the allegedly human being you are today. 

 

Hyperbole aside, this really is terrible. They already changed it so that the top scorer on the losing team does not lose a star. I think that change was reasonable and warranted. I can even see an argument that someone on the winning team who doesn't contribute (maybe if the bottom scorer has less than half the xp of the second-lowest score, or a metric like that) shouldn't gain a star. But the system you outline would make me not play ranked battles, so it's a wash as to your "I won't play ranked battles until this happens" ultimatum. So please, keep sitting ranked battles out, as I don't think I want you as a teammate anyway. 

They don't play as a team now or in the past.  How is it unfair, please explain?  Also I did not belittle or insult anyone in my reply, why did you have to too make your point?  Are you unable to intelligently respond to a post without doing so?  Sounds like you’re the type of teammate no one would not want on their side.

I think players are afraid of this system because it would truly show how poor of a player they are.  If they are going to keep using the same format then they should change the name, because they are not “Ranked” Battles.

Otherwise “Rank” each player per side on how they did for that team and let only the top 3 or 4 from each team advance.  These are nothing more than modified team battles.

I for one am tired of playing my backside off and watch someone who did little to nothing advance when there were better players on the other team.

[IceSerpen7]

Then please explain it to me so I can understand.

 

1. Scoring by team position leads to a situation where the difference of just a couple of points is the difference between losing (and gaining in your proposal) a star or not. There's really no fair reason why a player with 1234 points is treated so differently from a player with 1233 points. A much better setup is where people above certain (very high) threshold on the losing team don't lose a star and people below certain (very low) threshold on the winning team don't gain a star.

2. Having a single scoreboard can be very easily abused by a clan sync-dropping and agreeing to not shoot each other until all "outsiders" are dead. This ensures that all participants end up on the top part of the scoreboard. Helping the red team to hunt down those outsiders (i.e. by divulging their positions via voice comms) would become rampant too.

 

[Polaris_]

I'm still kicking myself for not buying the Gremy...