Jump to content
You need to play a total of 5 battles to post in this section.
Archangel_Trounce

Ranked: Star for 1st place loss (alt suggestion)

33 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

Hello!

If you lose a ranked round but are in first place you save your star. This effects how a lot of people play and can drive the team to losing. Why? Because: "If I stay really far away and let my team die quickly, I can save my star. I won't contribute anything to help, but they died fast so they didn't need me anyways"

Stop rewarding first place stars or any stars for losing.

Instead, award a BONUS star to someone who wins maybe three or four games in a row.

Thank you very much for reading!

  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Thornir    72

I am not sure this is the case.

The ranking is based on experience. You get experience by engaging the enemy, taking caps, defending caps, that sort of thing. People that attempt to be #1 on their team by playing passive and being last to die should learn pretty quickly that those that played hard and tried to make a difference will be the ones at the top, not them.

Keeping the star for being #1 on a losing team is the only way you can advance at all, sometimes.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Shield380    108

The bonus star idea is a little flawed in that it could sometimes be unfair to top players who have to carry their team for a few games and then those who didn't do anything get an extra star? 

1 hour ago, Thornir said:

I am not sure this is the case.

The ranking is based on experience. You get experience by engaging the enemy, taking caps, defending caps, that sort of thing. People that attempt to be #1 on their team by playing passive and being last to die should learn pretty quickly that those that played hard and tried to make a difference will be the ones at the top, not them.

Keeping the star for being #1 on a losing team is the only way you can advance at all, sometimes.

^^^^ Very, very true. Experience is the biggest aspect of this game (besides RNGesus, that is), and so trying to negate this experience-based reward system would be a little nonsensical. Always make sure to actively support your team and push/tactically retreat WITH them in Ranked, only solo if you have a particularly opportune advantage or other items such as that. 

Happy hunting!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dareios    77

I agree with this.

twice yesterday (that would be all my ranked games before I rage quit) there was an allied amagi who drove in the opposite direction to the team, hid behind an island for 10 minutes until 4/7 of our ships were dead from from focus fire, and then drove out to farm side shots on wounded ships. Both times he was the primary reason we lost, and both times (s)he got top loser due to the ability to be full hp at the end game and not be focused at a cap.

terrible, terrible team play rewarded yet again by a bad system

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Kevs02Accord    98

So we should remove this safety net to protect people who play well because some people are abusing it? I don't usually play to save a star, but when I contribute more than my fair share to the team and we still lose, I am glad to have not lost a star. And yes, some times I play to save a star because the team is so full of complete potatoes you have no chance of winning.

So no, keep the saving a star, in fact, expand it to the top 2 losers. I can't count the number of times I lost a star by less than 75 pts. Nothing more frustrating then playing on a team of shitters and you and another top guy both get over 1k base exp, but you lose a star by 50 pts!?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Bronco    87

Played a game where a DD and I were the last ones alive against 3 others, behind by 50 pts or so with each team owning a cap. I moved in with my Tirpitz to safeguard our cap while requesting the DD (nearly full health) to contend their cap. Instead of running towards their cap, he ran to the corner of Neighbors to hide. He figured the game was lost (which it wasn't) and he expected that I would die (which I did in a 1v3 battle). So staying alive with a kill and a base cap assist, he expected to save himself a star. Unfortunately, for him, despite not having any kills, I had 132k damage (high caliber) and a lot of base defense points by virtue of him leaving me to defend the base against 2 BBs and a DD. We could have won had he contended/capped their base instead of allowing the enemy to focus solely on me. 

I posted the message "You can run and hide if you want, but you're not saving that star." in chat. To which he responded, "How so? I'm the only one alive" followed by "Too bad you're dead, lol". Sure enough, I was ahead of him by nearly 230 points and saved a star. And as expected, I was reported (by him I assume) when he didn't get his participation award! 

Given the position of the other team, he could have easily contended the other cap long enough for us to gain the lead in points. Capping it entirely was doubtful but sometimes all you need is a lead to force the other team to push into you. Consequently, he could then return to A (near the middle island on Neighbors) to spot, smoke fire, area denial with torps anyone that approached our cap. With the lead in points, a kill would seal the deal.

Rather than help his team, he decided to run to save a star and in effect, created the very situation that I needed (given my position) to secure enough XP to save myself a star. Oh, the irony :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Radar_X    235

We've received a lot of feedback around this mechanic and really appreciate your thoughts on it.  Once the season is complete the team is going to review both feedback and data which could lead to possible tweaks.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sere_Pj    25

Hope so Radar, it is a problem, have been in two Ranked already today, one DD did not contest the cap, thought he would ride it out with 1 kill, and yes we lost but he saved the star. Another one in a Chappy tried to hide behind a island thinking he could in another battle, we won but only two ships survived I guess he thought he would keep the star for doing nothing which is what the BB thought too, but the BB did move and engage the enemy just a poor shot. It is pretty odd when players start with questions like ( Who is AFK ) at the start of a battle, ironic if you ask me, then the battle starts and there they sit.

Hopefully WG with look at this carefully and do the right thing.

Thanks,

Sere_Pj

  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Kombat_W0MBAT    2,690

People say the "save a star" thing is a problem when it's not. 

If people are consistently playing selfishly in order to save a star, then they aren't actively contributing to winning. If they're not winning, they're not advancing. 

 

Edited by Kombat_W0MBAT
  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dee_Greg    5

Top 7 xp earner out of both teams should gain a star, 8th should not gain or loose, rest should loose a star

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
CLUCH_CARGO    470
5 minutes ago, Dee_Greg said:

Top 7 xp earner out of both teams should gain a star, 8th should not gain or loose, rest should loose a star

This right here is the answer. Ranking should have it's own scoring style. Raw Exp only no win bonus. You receive exp by what you did in battle. Each rewardable stat is awarded to those who completed said stat. End game stats for all players are tallied and rewarded . Top 7 win number 8 holds star bottom 6 lose .

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dee_Greg    5

I would be ok to keep the win bonus in points... after all, the goal is to win. Otherwise it would be a dmg grind fest.

Edited by Dee_Greg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have an even better Idea! How about you all stop complaining and play with a little more teamwork, don't go firing straight into the enemy, sitting broadside in smoke after firing torpedos only to get smashed by enemy torpedos or coming in too close in your indestructible battleship instead of using your range. So many of you whine so much about how everyone else should play when you don't know how to play a competitive way yourselves. If you find yourself thinking you need to tell everyone else how to play when your dead and they're still playing there are 2 other scenarios for you, one being random and the other being co-op so you can really "always win". Ranked isn't for everyone, Not everyone gets a trophy in the end. Maybe it just isn't for you. 

Also one last thing. When people go out of there way to hide there stats it says Volumes about the way they play. 

Your welcome for your dose of reality for the day. Carry on. 

Edited by Filthy_Pelican

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
sbcptnitro    496
2 hours ago, Bronco said:

And as expected, I was reported (by him I assume) when he didn't get his participation award! 

And then comes to the forums complaining about how the the star system in ranked is broken.

33 minutes ago, Dee_Greg said:

Top 7 xp earner out of both teams should gain a star, 8th should not gain or loose, rest should loose a star

That way different than letting someone on the losing team keep a star (not gain one), and opens the whole system up to lots of abuse.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dareios    77
2 hours ago, Filthy_Pelican said:

Also one last thing. When people go out of there way to hide there stats it says Volumes about the way they play. 

 

If it speaks volumes, you should have no problem articulating several points about exactly how I personally play in ranked.

go on. Im calling you out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
LordBenjamin    209
4 hours ago, Kombat_W0MBAT said:

People say the "save a star" thing is a problem when it's not. 

If people are consistently playing selfishly in order to save a star, then they aren't actively contributing to winning. If they're not winning, they're not advancing. 

 

 

Sort of but you're just as well off winning 5/10 games and 2/5 losses at top XP than you are winning 6/10 and not being top XP earner in any of the 4 losses.   There is a point in every loss where you can pick between one of two options 1) Take a chance to try to salvage a win.   2) survive and farm damage for 5 more minutes but guaranteed loss.

When I see someone pick #2 it really annoys me at a very basic level.  The kind of annoyance that has gotten me to quit ranked every season since 2 (I also just simply prefer playing with friends in a division).   I'd rather see less skilled players grinding wins using Season 2 mechanics where each rank had a free star than use the mechanic of saving stars at top XP.   

A middle ground where you no longer lose a star at a certain XP threshold is also something I'd try. 

Edited by LordBenjamin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Thornir    72

So lemme get this straight...

People want to prohibit the top XP earner on the losing team from keeping their star, when that person somehow didn't do enough to earn it?

I got this to say about that: XP is XP. You earn the most, you earn the most, and if you don't want some undeserving fek to get the top spot, then YOU go earn it.

If a team plays so poorly that someone can hide behind a rock all game, come out and earn the highest XP at the end, then you, having been on that team, and not being good enough to do better, have no room to complain.

Also, why would someone under these circumstances want to deprive the player that goes all out and tries to carry and falls short of some reward? We want to punish the good player because someone that doesn't deserve the reward in your eyes "might" get it?

Newsflash: That person that gamed the system (but still did better than you, mind) isn't going to go far. holding on to stars isn't winning new ones. Don't worry about them, worry about yourself. I'd be embarrassed to come in here and complain that someone that farmed some XP at the end game did better than I did fighting it out, personally.

 

But that's just me.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I hate the idea of save a star.

Win get star.  Lose and lose star.

Do away with all of the mid level irrevocable rank crap too while you are at it.  Way to many people yoloing multiple games at a time knowing that in the end they can throw enough crapat the wall to rank 1. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Manic_Clown    0

This isn't a true rank system. Players start with an advantage from a previous season (it's not like the super bowl champs start the season at game 10 of a 15 game season)  and players with low xp for a game can still advance with their team wins.

The only fair things are these:

All players start at the same rank.This will even out players and no one gets a head start.

Irrespective of team, the top 7 base xp earners move forward. Number eight can keep the star if this wanted. There have been a couple of times I was on a losing team in spot 2 and still had higher base xp then the last one or two players on the winning team.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sere_Pj    25

Manic_Clown, Not all the players started at the same Rank, if you never participated in Ranked battles last year, you start at Rank 23, if you did participate last year as myself I ended at 16 Rank, and I started at 19. so to say players don't get a head start is totally wrong on your part.

Thanks,

Sere_Pj

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

WG should clarify what the intent is with ranked.   It is mostly 'ability to team with strangers and win games', but with the 'top loser keeps a star' mechanic it is also ' play to get most xp on your team'.  These two are sorta mostly complementary but....  not really.  The amount of discussion and chatter on the forums and sometimes in chat about that save a star is amazing.  It is silly to think it does not affect gameplay on average, and to some extent it works against teamwork.    

Rules for ranked which entirely promote winning and teamplay:

- drop the save a star thing

- all on winning team get the same base xp and silver, losers get half that.  

- play with the total stars and irrevocable ranks to get to a doable grind.

That would be clear.  Only your ability to team with strangers and win games is being tested and asked by the system.  Not your farming ability, or amazing individual prowess in this or that mechanic.  You have warshipstoday and others to look at if your general skill is of interest.

People hate just winrate because it cannot smooth out the ups and downs of 'bad team RNG' aka "I hate potatoes' until you are at like 100 battles, or more.  That is just the nature of win/loss, there is no solution.  Grind.  Grind some more.  Your 'bad team RNG' will even out and after the grind you will have a winrate and rank pretty congruent with that single question, can you team with randoms and win games?  In this team based game.

Hybrid scoring systems (save a star, or top 7 xp both teams, or top two save and bottom winner loses, etc etc etc) where individual performance as much as team wins gets you up the ladder promote unclear objectives and selfish play, of course.  Some people pick ships and start games thinking about that star, this is clear from forums and sometimes chat.  And it is only partially aligned with winning.  Which is then like all other game venues except clan battles, in randoms scenarios and coop there is little need to play for the team to progress in the game.  Lets get ranked clean,  just wins. 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Thornir    72
13 hours ago, drunkenduncan said:

WG should clarify what the intent is with ranked.   It is mostly 'ability to team with strangers and win games', but with the 'top loser keeps a star' mechanic it is also ' play to get most xp on your team'.  These two are sorta mostly complementary but....  not really.  The amount of discussion and chatter on the forums and sometimes in chat about that save a star is amazing.  It is silly to think it does not affect gameplay on average, and to some extent it works against teamwork.    

Rules for ranked which entirely promote winning and teamplay:

- drop the save a star thing

- all on winning team get the same base xp and silver, losers get half that.  

- play with the total stars and irrevocable ranks to get to a doable grind.

That would be clear.  Only your ability to team with strangers and win games is being tested and asked by the system.  Not your farming ability, or amazing individual prowess in this or that mechanic.  You have warshipstoday and others to look at if your general skill is of interest.

People hate just winrate because it cannot smooth out the ups and downs of 'bad team RNG' aka "I hate potatoes' until you are at like 100 battles, or more.  That is just the nature of win/loss, there is no solution.  Grind.  Grind some more.  Your 'bad team RNG' will even out and after the grind you will have a winrate and rank pretty congruent with that single question, can you team with randoms and win games?  In this team based game.

Hybrid scoring systems (save a star, or top 7 xp both teams, or top two save and bottom winner loses, etc etc etc) where individual performance as much as team wins gets you up the ladder promote unclear objectives and selfish play, of course.  Some people pick ships and start games thinking about that star, this is clear from forums and sometimes chat.  And it is only partially aligned with winning.  Which is then like all other game venues except clan battles, in randoms scenarios and coop there is little need to play for the team to progress in the game.  Lets get ranked clean,  just wins. 

 

 

 

You know what?

I come into every match with premium consumables, full set of performance - based signals, prepared to give my all to winning the match.

Safe to say half of my team mates don't even bother with camo. I am trying HARD to win. I have zero control over who my team mates are, and whether or not they are similarly dedicated. I am a DD main and I am VERY influenced by the play of my team mates. So, should I finish at the top of a losing team, at the LEAST, I earned the right to retain my current position. Ranked is different from Random. Ranked is where we demonstrate and are rewarded for skill and ability. 

I am a team player. The things I do for my team translate into XP. It is COMPLETELY appropriate for the person that contributes the most to their team's cause to not have to fall back because they were surrounded by team mates (not of their choosing) that couldn't get it done.

I'm a 54% DD player. Good but not great. If it weren't for the possibility of being rewarded for my dedication to team play provided by the retention of my progress, I wouldn't bother. Why should I? I could be cleaning up in Randoms instead of banging my head against the (ranked) wall.

People that think that the star retention for the top player on the losing team is a bad idea feel that way because they are seldom in that position. I am frequently, and even at a 60% win rate in Ranked, it would be a waste of time to play these games without that assurance.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Exciton8964    104

I actually like the fact that top exp earner saving a star during a loss.

It encourages the losing side to try hard even in seemingly lost games. I have had 2 games already this season where my team turned around from a very bad disadvantage(losing both DDs early while all enemy ships are alive). At least a couple more where we were very close to a come back.

W/O such incentive, players might give up early since they might save more time by moving on to the next game.

As for passive playstyle to save star, such things do happen but rarely in my experience. The rest of the team have to all play quite bad to let such passive player earn top place in exp chart. 

Edited by Exciton8964

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, Thornir said:

You know what?

I come into every match with premium consumables, full set of performance - based signals, prepared to give my all to winning the match.

Safe to say half of my team mates don't even bother with camo. I am trying HARD to win. I have zero control over who my team mates are, and whether or not they are similarly dedicated. I am a DD main and I am VERY influenced by the play of my team mates. So, should I finish at the top of a losing team, at the LEAST, I earned the right to retain my current position. Ranked is different from Random. Ranked is where we demonstrate and are rewarded for skill and ability. 

I am a team player. The things I do for my team translate into XP. It is COMPLETELY appropriate for the person that contributes the most to their team's cause to not have to fall back because they were surrounded by team mates (not of their choosing) that couldn't get it done.

I'm a 54% DD player. Good but not great. If it weren't for the possibility of being rewarded for my dedication to team play provided by the retention of my progress, I wouldn't bother. Why should I? I could be cleaning up in Randoms instead of banging my head against the (ranked) wall.

People that think that the star retention for the top player on the losing team is a bad idea feel that way because they are seldom in that position. I am frequently, and even at a 60% win rate in Ranked, it would be a waste of time to play these games without that assurance.

 

People always take it personal.  On average folks gameplay changes with the star.  I would think purple and blue players playstyle changes little if at all with the save a star, however greens and below are not good enough and have to game a 'save a star' strategy which will hurt their teamplay, on average.  Greens in particular have a hope of getting a star but are not good enough to try and farm xp at the same time as they try to win.  DDs dash off at the beginning of the game to hopefully grab an uncontested cap....  this can be OK but perhaps they should have stuck with the team and helped the most immediate needs?  By the time they are back the game may already be lost or won.   Some guy is working on his tirpitz captain and therefore could care less about winning, camping and getting good xp for such is just fine, meets his objectives for silver and captain xp, no need to win.  Etc etc.

We only have clan battles and sorta ranked as game modes where winning is the only incentive to play.  Half of random players or scenarios players are going for 'be the first to spot a german BB', or 'grind that ship' etc etc.   We could clean up ranked and make it win only as the only way to advance.  In addition to leveling team benefits you could also play with the economy so that losing win records make no particular silver or xp, and winning records are rewarded handsomely.  And control the grind number by playing with total stars and irrevocable ranks.  

Whatever, the concept is not popular.  People do not agree that we need a game mode where the only objective is to win.  They wish to be rewarded for personal achievement while the game mode is trying to promote teamplay.  And the tug of war continues.  It will be interesting to see what WG does as the two positions are not close.

EDIT:  I would love to play a game mode where the only thing in my mind when I start the game is 'how do we win', and I know my teammates are all thinking the same thing.   No teammates who are thinking about how much xp and silver they can get, how to save that star, how to get more captain xp etc.  Just clean, win and be rewarded, lose and no reward.   Just teamplay and that alone.

 

 

Edited by drunkenduncan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×