My ideas on Ranked

[After__Effect]

so. As far as I am concerned, this season's cursed rank is 13. No matter what I do, I can not get over 13.

as some of you Sherlocks have guessed it, this is about changing Ranked and my ideas on "how to" change 

I hope but highly doubt that WG would actually read or take this into consideration or even show someone has read it. (hell, they don't even listen to the super-testers lmbo... how do I know? if they listened to the super-testers, half the dumb things in

this game would have been fixed fr) BUT, my hope is that you 'the players' would raise your voice and make them change Ranked. (what am I thinking. This is NA)

 

---

 

Problem

We all know it, those normal potatoes ruining the round DESPITE one doing over 100k in his or her favorite tier 6 ship. You ask for teammate to do the completely justified action but most of the time, they just simply ignore you or do the complete opposite. So even though you have done everything possible regardless of the type of the ships you are in, you still gets punished when your team can't perform as good or better or simply, just doesn't communicate. BUT, this is completely different story in higher ranks where the players with functioning brain inside their skull play the damn game. Yes, this is the definition of written salt that a lot of you and especially I have been stripped like a hooker and been drenched in. 

 

---

 

Solution(?)

lol, there isn't one and there won't be one unless WG changed the fundamental elements of the game like the current state of CV. While both being introduced in different stages of the game, Ranked I think is easier to fix. 

So, hypothetically, lets just assume WG is willing to change Ranked. Here is what they can do to better Ranked.

Have any of you played Rainbow Six Seige? you might say "dOn'T c0MpAre DifFeRaNt G4mEz". let me tell you darling, I am comparing R6S with WoWs because both are seriously dependent on teamwork and communications.

for those of you who do not know R6S, here is the brief summary of how the game works. You need to know the general inter-workings of the game to understand what I am about to say

Spoiler

R6S is a 5v5 FPS game. for defending, it involves barricades (that can be broken down in multitude of actions), Reinforcements of destructible walls (to prevent fraggers that can bust through dry walls), traps, cameras, barbed wire....etc

and for attacking, you are relying on your far more superior Assault rifle (which the defenders don't get except 1 defending operator), Drones, and gadgets. Trust me, This game requires awareness through Intel, communication, sound, and traces of destruction(change of surrounding). AND TEAMWORK. IF your teammate in defending round chooses Valkyrie(who can throw tiny cameras around the map and teammates can access those cams and see who is there), throws camera on a critical choke-point, and doesn't say jack crapwhen he sees there is a enemy waiting for you to turn the corner. make sense? communication, team work is the foremost important skill and making good call-outs trumps your ability of aiming well. Trust me when I say this, there is a defined function in this game. communicate=win no communication=lose.  

 

for those of you who read the above or who already now well about R6S, here I go

1. R6S has score(numerical) system for ranked(for instance, you need to have score of 3600 to reach gold 1) instead of a defined-number-of-rounds to work up your rank. The idea is that how about changing WoWs ranked system into score based so that those who performed better earns more and loses less but this gap between how much points the top player of the round and the bottom player gets should be SIGNIFICANTLY BIG. Also, set a cap where if one did not do a notable amount of contribution to the team, even though if the team he or she is in wins, the one on the bottom or the one who did not exceed the cap does not earn any points but does not lose any points.

 

2. WoWs has this strange logic of discouraging team-play despite WoWs being dependent on team-play.... hmm. In R6S, I am gold 1 and level 138. I have 800 hours in this game and I have carried my self up to gold 1 without any squad mates because I am not in a clan(there are 4 levels in each tier in ranked. copper 4,3,2,1, bronze 4,3,2,1, silver gold plat diamond respectively) Is this bragging? no. This is what I want to say. If you understand how R6S works, you would know that it works on team cooperation and callouts from your teammates. Does WoWs need to change in a way that it encourages team-play more? YES. But can this happen instantly? no. So this is what I am suggesting. Allow divisions in Ranked While it may be biased, this is the simplest and justified way of hot fixing the ranked. WG should see no problem in a game where divisioned players out perform those who are not in division and those who do not communicate. 

 

3. Allow higher Tier ships to be played in higher ranks. Currently, Tier 6 is just..... It can easily be accessed by new players who just got their hands on premium ship. They Ruin The Ranked. I suggest allowing only tier 9 ships and higher on considerably high ranks. You might say this prevents a lot of players from reaching the high ranks. True, but that is fine because those fairly new players won't be reaching higher ranks anyways. equivalent to that, in R6S, ANY player can reach diamond. But do they? Nope, new players are never seen reaching over silver due to ranks in R6S reflect individual's overall ability and is capped by players with good skills. In WoWs, the cap should be ship tiers and I said tier 9 and above is because there is only 1 premium in tier 9 and above. 

 

4. put alpha sign on ranked and label it 'work still in progress' because by no means it is a finished part of the game. Same goes for CV

 

---

 

Conclusion

 

WGplzFix

 

 

EDIT: I have like 16 more possible solutions but I can't see how I can incorporate that into a game that involves ship and a slow paced game some mentally challenged individuals buy tier 8 ship right off the bat. I'll add one by one

 

[Grevester]

24 minutes ago, Solid_S6 said:

 

---

 

Problem

We all know it, those normal potatoes ruining the round DESPITE one doing over 100k in his or her favorite tier 6 ship. You ask for teammate to do the completely justified action but most of the time, they just simply ignore you or do the complete opposite. So even though you have done everything possible regardless of the type of the ships you are in, you still gets punished when your team can't perform as good or better or simply, just doesn't communicate. BUT, this is completely different story in higher ranks where the players with functioning brain inside their skull play the damn game. Yes, this is the definition of written salt that a lot of you and especially I have been stripped like a hooker and been drenched in. 

 

 

So, if I suggested an action in a match to you, you would have to comply why exactly? Nothing is making the suggestion I make infallible, nor should I expect to be allowed to impose my suggestion to you with the stipulation that either 1, you listen or 2, you're bad. People have their own agency, you do not control them or get to tell them what to do. All you can do is make an open suggestion and they can either accept or deny however they like.

 

You only have agency of yourself. If the skill gap between you and those around you is so significant as you want to act like, you can easily influence your way up ranks alone. This has been proven by the skill level of players who rank out quickly compared to the skill level of those that take longer. A lack of teamwork or inefficient co-operation should not be holding you back on it's own, and if you are struggling you may want to look to at yourself. Since you have so freely blamed those around you, I am now going to blame you directly.

 

In the game you compare it to, everyone still starts with an equal score. Over time, what determines good players and bad players separates these two extremes. This is exactly what happens in this mode. 

 

 

[anonym_CSdztHGM3fXS]

The idea that the ship tier ruins ranked because it lets more players in is asinine. This entire lament is easily proven false because the higher skilled players will still leave the lower skilled players behind and do so quickly. How? Because if they are truly as skilled as they claim they will be able to alter the close games. They won't be able to carry a bad team but in a close match their skill should be able to ensure a good outcome if not protect their own status by finishing up on top of the leader board. One this watching streamers has shown me, the tier isn't the fault, its the player. Listening to them harp about how bad other players are only to see them rarely finish in top 3 unless their team wins is telling. The simple fact is, they are not good enough to effect the outcome so they blame everything but themselves. Requesting divisions to be added just proves it, you need your good friends to carry you.

[Crucis]

39 minutes ago, fourteenfour said:

The idea that the ship tier ruins ranked because it lets more players in is asinine. This entire lament is easily proven false because the higher skilled players will still leave the lower skilled players behind and do so quickly. How? Because if they are truly as skilled as they claim they will be able to alter the close games. They won't be able to carry a bad team but in a close match their skill should be able to ensure a good outcome if not protect their own status by finishing up on top of the leader board. One this watching streamers has shown me, the tier isn't the fault, its the player. Listening to them harp about how bad other players are only to see them rarely finish in top 3 unless their team wins is telling. The simple fact is, they are not good enough to effect the outcome so they blame everything but themselves. Requesting divisions to be added just proves it, you need your good friends to carry you.

 

Actually, your logic is asinine.  You set the premise as "The idea that the ship tier ruins ranked because it lets more players in is asinine."  And then you claim that it's proven false with a statement that's a non sequitur to your assertion, i.e. "because the higher skilled players will still leave the lower skilled players behind and do so quickly."  These two quotes have nothing to do with each other.

[Crucis]

OP, you want a change to Ranked Battles.  Here's one I've suggested.

 

There are 14 players in a ranked battle, both teams included.  After the battle is decided, win, lose, or draw, the top 7 base XP earners get a star.  Bottom 7 players on the winning team neither win nor lose a star.  And Bottom 7 players on the losing team do lose a star.

Additionally, perhaps players who are in the bottom 2 base XP earners, win or lose, lose a star.  (This would help with AFKs, since it would pretty much guarantee that AFK's lose a star.)

 

[Lensar]

1 hour ago, Pulicat said:

You only have agency of yourself. If the skill gap between you and those around you is so significant as you want to act like, you can easily influence your way up ranks alone. This has been proven by the skill level of players who rank out quickly compared to the skill level of those that take longer.

 

This. 

 

I get that it sucks when you seem to get a string of teams that can't seem to do anything right. But that's going to happen sometimes in ranked. Hell, when I started season 7, I was running a 30% win rate initiallty on my Hatsu. When I finally climbed to rank 10 from 13, it had risen to 45%. From rank 10 to rank 5, it was 75%. 

 

Basically, the lower you are in rank, the more diversity in player skill your teams are likely to have, which is going to make your win percentage shade in the direction of 50%. The higher you go, the less player diversity your teammates and opponents are likely to see, and you'll have less of a pull on your win percentage towards 50% and more weight your personal contribution towards helping the team win, comes into play.

 

10 minutes ago, Crucis said:

There are 14 players in a ranked battle, both teams included.  After the battle is decided, win, lose, or draw, the top 7 base XP earners get a star.  Bottom 7 players on the winning team neither win nor lose a star.  And Bottom 7 players on the losing team do lose a star.

 

That's not ranked. That's something entirely different. That's pretty much 7 player random battles.

 

Score is a measure of nothing but itself. Random battles already rewards players for gaming the score system. Ranked is about doing everything and anything you can to win. This is what makes it special and fun. 

 

Another benefit of it is that ranked allows you to tell which "purple folk" are actually good at the game and which are just stat padders. Stat padders do not do well in ranked, and most "purple folk" will refuse to participate in them, specifically because they cannot game the system to work in their advantage.

[Crucis]

Seems like Ranked to me.  And the fact that winning always improves one's XP earning still puts a premium on winning.  If a lot of purples don't want to play ranked, well too effing bad. 

[HazardDrake]

Solution: Go back to seasons 2 & 3 where anyone could rank out in a reasonable amount of time without needing to be unemployed. 

[Ghost_Raven75]

I just find it funny when he said that WG Doesn't listen to the Supertesters.  That one was rich.