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

Should Ranked status be used in Matchmaking?

43 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

2,488
[PSP]
Members
6,041 posts
8,583 battles

It's not necessarily true that Ranked players are better than some non-Ranked players in WOWS. However, it may be true that those who do not play Ranked are generally more "casual" players who have not yet learned how to play as a team but merely play the individual "pew pew pew" game.

 

rrr.jpg.de75d2ab6e41df508b9142d07c9de4fe.jpg   

shot-18_02.01_19_52.35-0325.jpg.0dca94e57384c01ac09d255d8c4d753c.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
1,243 posts
20,622 battles

Yes.  Generally, people who have endured rankled battles come out as better players than they were - at least for the few weeks after ranked ends.

If it's an easy fix I would applaud it.

But they need to get the radar ship numbers on each side in ranked battles balanced first.  Hopefully before the next season.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
81
[_FOG_]
[_FOG_]
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
431 posts
2,670 battles

I have played in ranked in the first couple of seasons , never really liked it , too much of a grind .

Teams are a dice roll  ,and if you can't carry hard it will take a looong time too slog through .

At least that was what it was like back then .

Just because someone doesn't have a " rank" does not mean they are not good .

There are many very good players who don't play ranked battles .

so my answer to your question would be no.

If you have ranked out Great Job ! i applaud your skill , or perseverance  whichever it took.

But Rank should have no place in Random MM .

Just my humble opinion , no offence meant to anyone.

 

 

  • Cool 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19
[WOLF2]
Alpha Tester
134 posts
9,247 battles

No, that will not work. Because many good player dont play rank .

the % player have ranked are small compare to total player base. 

  • Cool 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,607
[E-E]
[E-E]
Members
15,623 posts
14,017 battles

No.

I've seen poor rank badge players do extremely well.

I've seen high rank badge players stink up like rotten lettuce.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
417
[CAST]
Members
1,398 posts
5,815 battles

I think there's a decent amount of players out there who just don't want to play as part of a division/clan, but who are pretty good at working with randoms when those other people are willing as well.  I know there are plenty of very good players who don't bother with ranked, whether because they don't like the structure, the frustration, or the often toxic behavior.  I do know that both of these statements apply to me, anyway (I knock out the first few levels of ranked just for the easy rewards, but that's it).

I can tell you that some of the absolute worst teammates I've had in Randoms were divisions of players with ranks <10.  There are obviously exceptions, but generally speaking these are the people who formulate their own game plan and execute it without any communication to the rest of the team and without even a glance at what their other teammates are doing...and then blame everyone else when they get annihilated and the rest can't make up for their loss.

So...no.  It shouldn't.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
359
[DAY]
Members
1,154 posts
11,500 battles

first thought is:

if current MM is balanced, well then rank based MM wont change much....you will be on the "5 rank1" side as often as the "facing 5 rank1" side

 

after thinking further:

id like it to take rank into consideration, at least it would prevent some really one-sided battle, which is anything but fun

(really onesided = over in 6 minutes, one side's point went negative while no one on the other team died)

Edited by jason199506

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
585
[ARRGG]
Members
4,674 posts
7,503 battles

I played ranked for the flags,always stopping at 10 when the flags dry up

they may not necessarily be using ranked status in MM but they may be using. Your overall how good you are to match you up in Random battles... would account for some odd win loose streaks

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,824
[ARRGG]
[ARRGG]
Members
5,770 posts

What I don't understand is why people want segregation. I want the full monty,the entire enchilada, A full spectrum of players in my games.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
552
[WOLF6]
Members
1,799 posts
4,826 battles
12 minutes ago, Captain_Avatar said:

I have played in ranked in the first couple of seasons , never really liked it , too much of a grind .

Teams are a dice roll  ,and if you can't carry hard it will take a looong time too slog through .

At least that was what it was like back then .

Just because someone doesn't have a " rank" does not mean they are not good .

There are many very good players who don't play ranked battles .

so my answer to your question would be no.

If you have ranked out Great Job ! i applaud your skill , or perseverance  whichever it took.

But Rank should have no place in Random MM .

Just my humble opinion , no offence meant to anyone.

 

 

Agreed. As much an indicator of perseverance as skill. Ranked is a significantly different game than Randoms as well. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,196
[GWG]
[GWG]
Members
5,335 posts
9,424 battles

In addition to Ranked - ending rank.....

They also now show clan affiliation, and if the clan is colored in, they have competed in clan battles.

Also shows service level -- for those who are down in the low tiers seal-clubbing.  In my battles, I've seen them as low as Service Level 5.

Balancing done:

--Ship Types: CVs, DDs, etc.

--Tier of ship

Better parts often goes to one side (usually not mine tonight)

--Divisions

--Service Levels

--Number Battleships

--Number Destroyers

--Clan Battle participants

--Ranked Battle participants.

...

Tonight has been MM hell for this account.  EVERY TEAM I had was given the brown end of the stick.  Every one was a serious struggle.  Managed to pull out one win.

In the one win, they had two divisions, we had one.  They had twice as many ranked and Clan battle participants.  My teams had all the single-digit service levels.  The other 2 battles were worse.

RNG was seriously bad with about every shot setting me on fire or taking out steering gear....  and I was only hit 8 times...  and they made 2 fires... and this was with the India Yankee flag.

I was kiting the whole mission.

When a Bogatyr gets beat up by an Isokaze's guns...  That's bad.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
2,748 posts
6,245 battles

Snarg, I follow your stuff and we are good friends. This is my take on ranked. It's intense and grueling. I personally feel like I'm fighting the best because they have the fortitude if that means anything. The guys out there are really good that go ranked. My hat's off to all Captains that made 5 and above.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
2,748 posts
6,245 battles

From the BB Dogpound, Captain Ghostdog, Officers and Crew. Enjoyed ranked fighting with the best. Our ship didn't do as well as hoped but we fought. To all Captains who moved up all dogs salute you sirs.

 

th?id=OIP.RtGeszUb-yjGTAhAJ1YJnwD0D_&pidth?id=OIP.pJpkZ-Q1FnK-QT6a12TyEQHaEK&pidth?id=OIP.8hBRZyG470-M9W0VllzCQgHaD9&pid

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
871
[WOLF9]
Members
1,036 posts
1 hour ago, Snargfargle said:

It's not necessarily true that Ranked players are better than some non-Ranked players in WOWS. However, it may be true that those who do not play Ranked are generally more "casual" players who have not yet learned how to play as a team but merely play the individual "pew pew pew" game.

 

rrr.jpg.de75d2ab6e41df508b9142d07c9de4fe.jpg   

shot-18_02.01_19_52.35-0325.jpg.0dca94e57384c01ac09d255d8c4d753c.jpg

That seems like a good way to kill the ranked battles, that are already on life support from the numbers. It opens up the scenario of manipulating rank to seal club.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
472
[WOLF8]
Alpha Tester
1,038 posts
4,367 battles

I feel like you would see a lot of stat padders and even some better players failing out of or not playing ranked battles just so they can be matched against easier targets since ranked battles are only around for a month or two and random battles are pretty much the standard.

Also I don't think people consider the downfall of these kinds of suggestions. They assume that by having skill-based matchmaking they are somehow going to be playing with the best. Realistically that's probably not going to happen. They also think that it would promote team play, but in actuality a lot of the better players tend to be self-centered and have the opinion that they know better than you, which might even be right. The end result would still be players playing to their own tactics and screaming in chat at everyone else who doesn't follow their genius lead. Lastly, even if your team was completely in tune with each other, the same would have to be true for the opposite team which means that either way matches aren't going to be any easier for anyone.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
585
[ARRGG]
Members
4,674 posts
7,503 battles
1 hour ago, Ghostdog1355 said:

Snarg, I follow your stuff and we are good friends. This is my take on ranked. It's intense and grueling. I personally feel like I'm fighting the best because they have the fortitude if that means anything. The guys out there are really good that go ranked. My hat's off to all Captains that made 5 and above.

Guys and “Gals” .. there real and there .. spectacular!

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
1,238 posts
8,932 battles
2 hours ago, Thornir said:

Agreed. As much an indicator of perseverance as skill. Ranked is a significantly different game than Randoms as well. 

really?... ....beg to differ... ...you have to have some perseverance to move up, but you need skill even more... ...both are necessary, but neither is sufficient...but without some skill at the higher ranks, no amount of perseverance will work...

43 minutes ago, HMCS_Devilfish said:

Guys and “Gals” .. there real and there .. spectacular!

I concur wholeheartedly....and I get hung up on this too, but "guys" implies guys and gals.....mixed groups get referred to as "guys" and I've seen exclusively female groups referred to as "you guys..."...(just being persnickety)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
319 posts
4,388 battles

They just need to put a cap on the number of sub 45% players on each team like they do With certain ship types.  I don't know if the CV and BB's are hard caps, but...something like 5 max.

And matching "division for division" within a two tier spread is dumb.  Division of three here division of three here...no matter that one is 6's and one is 8's or that mm went deeply after that and filled the rest of the slots with tier 7's for the reds.  

They cant even match tiers yet so don't hold your breath.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
202
[ZR]
WoWS Wiki Editor
552 posts
4,747 battles

No. Ranked is just a grindfest. I could probably do it within 200 games, but getting me to play those 200 games would be near impossible. 

 

If that happened, I could just not play ranked at all to have "camouflage"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
918 posts
2,449 battles
4 hours ago, jason199506 said:

first thought is:

if current MM is balanced, well then rank based MM wont change much....you will be on the "5 rank1" side as often as the "facing 5 rank1" side

 

after thinking further:

id like it to take rank into consideration, at least it would prevent some really one-sided battle, which is anything but fun

(really onesided = over in 6 minutes, one side's point went negative while no one on the other team died)

This would be the same as a skill based MM but in a much smaller pool. It would feel like ranked players were gonna be penalized with longer waits.

Maybe the better idea would be for the MM to make sure there was a better spread of those players among the teams. But then that's a skill based MM too. MM needs to be re-worked instead of stop gap measures.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,488
[PSP]
Members
6,041 posts
8,583 battles
6 hours ago, CLUCH_CARGO said:

What I don't understand is why people want segregation. I want the full monty,the entire enchilada, A full spectrum of players in my games.

Sometimes you get tired of people who have no clue as to how to play the game showing up on a random team. Think of a baseball game where anyone from high school to pro is selected to play randomly based on the fact that they are all fairly similar in size and using the same equipment. Maybe WOWS needs two matchmakers. A general one and a player-selected one. Of course, training rooms can be used to do this a bit but the process is cumbersome. It's shouldn't be too hard to institute game rooms as seen in many other games. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
552
[WOLF6]
Members
1,799 posts
4,826 battles
5 hours ago, commodore_torakula said:

really?... ....beg to differ... ...you have to have some perseverance to move up, but you need skill even more... ...both are necessary, but neither is sufficient...but without some skill at the higher ranks, no amount of perseverance will work...

I concur wholeheartedly....and I get hung up on this too, but "guys" implies guys and gals.....mixed groups get referred to as "guys" and I've seen exclusively female groups referred to as "you guys..."...(just being persnickety)

Yes, really. Awful lot of ranked out players with sub 50% overall solo win rates. And again, ranked and random are different games, with different skill sets required. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
1,238 posts
8,932 battles
38 minutes ago, Thornir said:

Yes, really. Awful lot of ranked out players with sub 50% overall solo win rates. And again, ranked and random are different games, with different skill sets required. 

Unlikely at best... ...none of the ranks above 12 is irrevocable...past that each rank takes 2, and then 3 or 4 more wins than losses to move up....do you mean some players could do badly for a while and then win at least 11x2+ or more than they lose and rank out?....they'd have to go from well below 50% in the short run to something like 40-10 wins to losses, or at least 70-40... ...doesn't happen...like I said: persistence is indispensable, but skill even more so...a rotten total WR and then to go 70-40 is mutually exclusive...my middling-at-best skills kept me no better than rank 10 or 11...

ranked v. random:...they're not different...the only real differences are that one is 8s and one is 12s....(which is exactly why ranked is more fun to me--less chaotic with only 8--more civilized)...even at the highest ranks, you're no more likely to be up against only other high-ranking players...it's still the same pool ...apart from that, the only fundamental difference in other seasons I can recall is that the spawns/caps in Strait were different. ...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×