Jump to content
You need to play a total of 5 battles to post in this section.
Willy55_1955

Upcoming Ranked Battles - Wanton Discrimination Against Lower Tier Players

100 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

56
[ONAVY]
[ONAVY]
Members
305 posts
9,678 battles

Well, last season I read a lot of posts of players decrying having to play with other players they felt were not entitled to play due to poor play or other perceived weakness. I believe I suggested that there be, maybe, tiers of battles where players play with other like players, e.g. Group C tiers 3-5, Group B 6-8, Group A 9-10. Each would give the greatest number of players the opportunity to play.

What Wargaming has chosen to do is cut out everyone below tier 10, cutting out a large amount of the player base. Sure, you can play tier 8 down to rank 11, and if you have no tier 10 that's the end for you. I see nothing in the announcement where you might be able to rent a tier 10 ship, as in Clan Battles. This is open pandering to the elitist class of player. Why not go tiers 7, 8 and 10 instead of 8, 10 and 7?

I suggested a longer load period to allow time for strategizing between people who never played together before. If I remember correctly it was about 30 seconds last season. How about 60 seconds? Maybe that would improve the level of gameplay.

There must be a better way to do Ranked without disenfranchising a large amount of the player base.

Oh, by the way, I have tier 10 ships.

  • Cool 3
  • Funny 2
  • Boring 10
  • Bad 11

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
184
[WOLFB]
Beta Testers
1,446 posts
6,360 battles

Well, people are not really missing out on much. Ranked battles are full of toxic turds.
Better of not playing them and keep your sanity intact. :Smile_teethhappy:

 

Maybe they could give those, who miss out, Ranked Co-oP battles instead.

See, then everyone can now have an ice cream. :cap_look:

  • Cool 2
  • Funny 2
  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
217
[P2W]
Members
681 posts

It's will most likely backfire on them. With the economic cost of playing T-10 they will most likely see an impossibly long queue to sit in to play above Rank 10 after the first couple of days.

I really don't see that many players going above Rank 10 as they have left no irrevocable ranks between Rank 10 and Rank 1 again with the rewards being paltry at best for the expense of playing at Tier 10.

And if you do make it through the long queue be prepared for a salt storm once the match starts. Tempers will be very short due to the loss of credits at this tier as even with a win sometimes will cost you credits unless you are a top performer.

Edited by DESRON10

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers
354 posts
8,409 battles

Can't wait for it tbh. Glad it's alienating the "low tier players". Most, if not all the competitive players have been waiting for WG to shift to T10 for CW and Ranked, was inevitable. There's really no excuse to not have a T10 at this point in the game and be mildly competent in it. As far as the T10 economy goes, it is countered by the flag(s) you get and increased credit gains received during a ranked match. 

  • Cool 4
  • Funny 1
  • Bad 12

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
126 posts
303 battles

I like it simply because I won’t have to listen to people complain about wallet warriors ruining ranked. Instead, I’ll get to listen to people complain about how many bad players there are at tier ten. This season will be a blast, I can tell already.

  • Cool 3
  • Funny 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
56
[ONAVY]
[ONAVY]
Members
305 posts
9,678 battles
2 minutes ago, Sillypuddi said:

Can't wait for it tbh. Glad it's alienating the "low tier players". Most, if not all the competitive players have been waiting for WG to shift to T10 for CW and Ranked, was inevitable. There's really no excuse to not have a T10 at this point in the game and be mildly competent in it. As far as the T10 economy goes, it is countered by the flag(s) you get and increased credit gains received during a ranked match. 

Hard to be competitive if you are not allowed to play past rank 11. And, yes, there are 'reasons' not to have tier 10. If you are an average player you will lose more credits than win. Quite a few people don't play T10 due to the economy. Why alienate them?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,582
[SALVO]
Members
16,618 posts
17,257 battles
5 hours ago, Sillypuddi said:

Can't wait for it tbh. Glad it's alienating the "low tier players". Most, if not all the competitive players have been waiting for WG to shift to T10 for CW and Ranked, was inevitable. There's really no excuse to not have a T10 at this point in the game and be mildly competent in it. As far as the T10 economy goes, it is countered by the flag(s) you get and increased credit gains received during a ranked match. 

Stop being a jerk.

If you've read these forums on anything approaching a regular basis, you should have noticed that there are a lot of players who just don't have any interest in high tier play.  (I'm not one of them, BTW.)  Why would these players bother to get a tier 10 if they have no interest in playing high tier battles?

As for the tier 10 ships in RkB's, I don't really care that much.  I'm of the opinion that WG looked at their data on who plays in RkB's above rank 10 and perhaps discovered that a very high percentage of those players had tier 10's.  And frankly, I get the feeling that the people complaining the loudest about this tier 10 ships in ranked probably weren't playing above rank 10 anyways, so why bother complaining about it?  I mean, sure, if you're in the (suspected) minority of high rank players who actually don't have tier 10's, perhaps you're a bit put off by this.  But if it is a minority of players, I'd suggest that those in that minority who really do play in the ranks above 10 should get moving and get themselves a tier 10 ship they want to use in RkB's.

Edited by Crucis
  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,819
Members
5,574 posts
7,121 battles

I think what worries me most is this will have some expense for we the players. You'll now have to get more than 1 ship/Commander ready for the Ranked.

Cutting out lower lvl Captains does make sense on the surface, but the majority of Scrubs play at T10, not low lvls.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,582
[SALVO]
Members
16,618 posts
17,257 battles
8 minutes ago, kagero__ said:

I like it simply because I won’t have to listen to people complain about wallet warriors ruining ranked. Instead, I’ll get to listen to people complain about how many bad players there are at tier ten. This season will be a blast, I can tell already.

I don't care about the wallet warrior complaints.  "Wallet warriors" fund this game.  And I get the feeling that those who complain about wallet warriors are too damned cheap to help support the game they play.

I personally like premium ships in Ranked, not because I think  that they're OP, but because I don't have to pay gold to transfer crews into a non-premium ship.  For example, I've heard is said that the North Carolina is a slightly better ship than the Alabama.  However, for me, it's not worth the cost of moving my Montana captain into the NC when I can move him into my Alabama for free.  To me, that's the greatest value that premium ships have in Ranked Battles.

Now, this season, if by chance I were to decide to try to push beyond rank 10, I won't have to move my tier 10 captains into a lower tier premium ship.  I can just leave them where they are and play the tier 10's.  

 

I do think that you're right about how we'll probably see a new round of complaints about all the bad players that have tier 10's.  And they'll be right.  There's nothing stopping weak players from grinding their way up into tier 10 ships and playing just as poorly in tier 10 battles as they do in low or mid tier battles.

Regardless, I don't really see myself going beyond rank 10 this season, primarily because I find the tedium of the RkBs grind too boring.

 

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,582
[SALVO]
Members
16,618 posts
17,257 battles
9 minutes ago, Wulfgarn said:

I think what worries me most is this will have some expense for we the players. You'll now have to get more than 1 ship/Commander ready for the Ranked.

Cutting out lower lvl Captains does make sense on the surface, but the majority of Scrubs play at T10, not low lvls.

Indeed, Wulfgarn.  Tier 10 ships are no guarantee of good players of those ships.

I do wonder about how costly it will be to play these tier 10's though.  Only time will tell.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,259
[WOLF2]
Members
2,992 posts
5,204 battles

Really I think tier 7 would be a lot less ptro after the smoke changes. Sure, only premiums have radar, but they're also light cruisers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
601
[BWC]
Beta Testers
1,311 posts
5,570 battles

So. The higher tiers in the game are only for 'elitists', and anyone who has chosen not to obtain a T10 is being 'disenfranchised'. This despite the statement that those players have chosen not to progress to T10 because 'they have no interest in high tier play'.

 

If the players being cited have no interest in higher tier play, why would they be considered disenfranchised from a part of the game (higher tiers of Ranked) that they have no interest in and have chosen themselves to not participate in? Perhaps the idea that higher tiers of Ranked are intended for higher tiers of gameplay has not been understood by those criticizing this, or just the idea that those who have chosen not to progress to a T10 ship are going to pay a price for not considering that their decision might have consequences in what content they have access to?

 

Finally, I love how the same people who claim anyone who plays a T10 ship is an elitist will also call them seal clubbers if they switch and play lower tiered ships. Seems some people just have that compulsion to want anyone who is more experienced/higher progressed in the game to be punitively hurt to make themselves feel better about their own lack of progress.

 

Yeah, I don't think this Ranked situation gives anyone who could have participated but chose not to any grounds for complaint.

Edited by Jakob_Knight
  • Cool 3
  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
545
[WOLF6]
Members
1,768 posts
4,790 battles

Spend the money once for the permanent camo, cost for service is cut in half. Makes the T10 significantly less expensive to play forever.

  • Cool 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,052
[OPG]
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
2,872 posts
10,414 battles

Pretty sure the people that normally rank out most likely have at least 1 tier 10

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
109
[SAINT]
[SAINT]
Members
283 posts
9,572 battles

I play ranked every season but usually burn out around ten due to time restrictions with work and family. This time I don't even have to worry about getting that far since I don't have a tier 10 ship yet (handful of tier 9s). From previous seasons we always see people buying premiums to play in ranked. I doubt people will be doing that this time around since many will be locked out of playing once they hit 11. It's a shame but it's Wargaming's money to lose. 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers
354 posts
8,409 battles
45 minutes ago, Crucis said:

Stop being an elitist turd.

If you've read these forums on anything approaching a regular basis, you should have noticed that there are a lot of players who just don't have any interest in high tier play.  (I'm not one of them, BTW.)  Why would these players bother to get a tier 10 if they have no interest in playing high tier battles?

As for the tier 10 ships in RkB's, I don't really care that much.  I'm of the opinion that WG looked at their data on who plays in RkB's above rank 10 and perhaps discovered that a very high percentage of those players had tier 10's.  And frankly, I get the feeling that the people complaining the loudest about this tier 10 ships in ranked probably weren't playing above rank 10 anyways, so why bother complaining about it?  I mean, sure, if you're in the (suspected) minority of high rank players who actually don't have tier 10's, perhaps you're a bit put off by this.  But if it is a minority of players, I'd suggest that those in that minority who really do play in the ranks above 10 should get moving and get themselves a tier 10 ship they want to use in RkB's.

Yes, I'm an elitist because I'm happy WG is finally moving Ranked and CW away from the casual players. Heaven forbid the competitive modes have competitive players in them. :fish_glass:

  • Cool 4
  • Funny 1
  • Bad 8

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
49
[TEARZ]
[TEARZ]
Beta Testers
291 posts
7,358 battles

Lets face facts the majority of players who go rank 5 or above are veterans of the game and have at least one tier 10. 

I think it is a great move on behalf of WG.

  • Cool 1
  • Bad 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
272 posts
54 minutes ago, Willy55_1955 said:

Hard to be competitive if you are not allowed to play past rank 11. And, yes, there are 'reasons' not to have tier 10. If you are an average bad player you will lose more credits than win. Quite a few people don't play T10 due to the economy. Why alienate them?

FTFY

  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
626 posts
1,630 battles
2 hours ago, Willy55_1955 said:

Well, last season I read a lot of posts of players decrying having to play with other players they felt were not entitled to play due to poor play or other perceived weakness. I believe I suggested that there be, maybe, tiers of battles where players play with other like players, e.g. Group C tiers 3-5, Group B 6-8, Group A 9-10. Each would give the greatest number of players the opportunity to play.

What Wargaming has chosen to do is cut out everyone below tier 10, cutting out a large amount of the player base. Sure, you can play tier 8 down to rank 11, and if you have no tier 10 that's the end for you. I see nothing in the announcement where you might be able to rent a tier 10 ship, as in Clan Battles. This is open pandering to the elitist class of player. Why not go tiers 7, 8 and 10 instead of 8, 10 and 7?

I suggested a longer load period to allow time for strategizing between people who never played together before. If I remember correctly it was about 30 seconds last season. How about 60 seconds? Maybe that would improve the level of gameplay.

There must be a better way to do Ranked without disenfranchising a large amount of the player base.

Oh, by the way, I have tier 10 ships.

What makes it even worse is this barrier comes at rank 10, which means players are going to be punished for getting that far if they don't have a T10. I thought the whole meritocracy argument was supposed to stop players with bad play(of which I am admittedly at least partially a case study of:) from ruining the quality of play but the players that are going to get hurt here are one's that aren't meritless. Getting to  rank 10 requires you to win like what at the bare minimum assuming you go on a godly win streak like 50-60 ranked games? The thing is if you split the tiers for ranked, it is impossible to fight players who hadn't done that even if they made it T6 or T7. Making the barrier T10 doesn't help quality it just serves to either take the opportunity away from deserving players or to force these players to bite the financial bullet needed to get to T10(which I think has to be what this is at least partially about). Lots of reasons high quality players won't have a T10, especially if they dedicate their resources to a bunch of lines. Takes well over 1000 matches to reach T10 with a focus on one line assuming you don't put money into climbing the tech tree, and a lot of players play diverse trees and ship types. I'm not one of them and while I've dabbled in a few lines, I've gotten a bunch of free French and UK BB's and bought my way up a few tiers as well. Despite these shortcuts I still don't have one T10 and if I'd taken no detours I still might either have no T10's or been on the verge of getting my first and this is more than balanced out by the shortcuts I've taken, including buying premiums to get more XP, easier something that isn't encouraged, which means people who grind the trees as recommended are going to get hurt the most here, as it's going to take them forever to make it.

Also another form of discrimination that we're not talking about, what if you only have one or two T10's? A large percentage of the people who aren't barred are going to have much more limited options  than they would have at a lower tier. What if you don't want to do ranked with your one or two T10's or don't want to play the same ship over and over and over again(I realize some are fine with this, that's okay too of course). Too bad, what's overshadowed here is that even people who can play will have less options, I don't have the stats but I think it's possible a majority of players with T10's only have one. I wonder what percentage of the player base have a diversity of T10 options sitting in their ports? Meanwhile at T6, T7 or even at T8(though this isn't the issue with T8, people are just tired of it)most players at that point will have options. While players could buy premiums to get access to those tiers, those are premiums, to buy entry into T10(which could cost up to hundreds of dollars depending on where you are) you are going to have to pay to get free stuff faster than you otherwise would have. Even for a segment of the pay to play population of which I am proudly a part(I mean we help fund the game), this has got to sting harder than buying a desired premium would. 

Edited by Aristotle83

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers
377 posts
6,035 battles
2 hours ago, Willy55_1955 said:

 

 This is open pandering to the elitist class of player. Why not go tiers 7, 8 and 10 instead of 8, 10 and 7?

 

There are no classes of players, as getting a T10 is not a sign of an elite player or class of player because a monkey that smashes its head against the keyboard repeatedly will eventually make it to T10.

The tiers you are suggesting have been done and people cried because T7-8 was full of premiums that others thought gave some kinda advantage.

.WG could pick any tier and "some" people would have a problem with it no matter what.

 

  • Cool 4
  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
75
[HAG]
Beta Testers
317 posts
4,070 battles

I would love to have two ranked seaons running consistently one being the the tier 8 and up and another (with less valuable rewards) running tier 4 and up as you progress it would be nice for all my tier 4, and 5 premium ships to have something to do since all the missions, clan battles, and scenarios are t6 and up.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
57
[ADOPT]
Members
187 posts
11,759 battles
47 minutes ago, Crucis said:

I don't care about the wallet warrior complaints.  "Wallet warriors" fund this game.  And I get the feeling that those who complain about wallet warriors are too damned cheap to help support the game they play.

I personally like premium ships in Ranked, not because I think  that they're OP, but because I don't have to pay gold to transfer crews into a non-premium ship.  For example, I've heard is said that the North Carolina is a slightly better ship than the Alabama.  However, for me, it's not worth the cost of moving my Montana captain into the NC when I can move him into my Alabama for free.  To me, that's the greatest value that premium ships have in Ranked Battles.

Now, this season, if by chance I were to decide to try to push beyond rank 10, I won't have to move my tier 10 captains into a lower tier premium ship.  I can just leave them where they are and play the tier 10's.  

 

I do think that you're right about how we'll probably see a new round of complaints about all the bad players that have tier 10's.  And they'll be right.  There's nothing stopping weak players from grinding their way up into tier 10 ships and playing just as poorly in tier 10 battles as they do in low or mid tier battles.

Regardless, I don't really see myself going beyond rank 10 this season, primarily because I find the tedium of the RkBs grind too boring.

 

Yes, the wallet warriors fund this game. That being said, I can't count how many people ended up on teams with others who had less than 10 games in the ship they were using for ranked due to the purchase of said ship. There is enough time between ranked seasons for someone to grind from t8 to t10 with very little difficulty and still have time to learn how to play in the t10 meta. At least with ranked set up this way we will have to worry less about having people with no high tier experience trying to learn while playing in a more competitive environment.

 

  • Cool 1
  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
626 posts
1,630 battles
15 minutes ago, Hanz_Gooblemienhoffen_42 said:

There are no classes of players, as getting a T10 is not a sign of an elite player or class of player because a monkey that smashes its head against the keyboard repeatedly will eventually make it to T10.

The tiers you are suggesting have been done and people cried because T7-8 was full of premiums that others thought gave some kinda advantage.

.WG could pick any tier and "some" people would have a problem with it no matter what.

 

Key here is the "eventually" and the fact this isn't quality assurance but a barrier to players who haven't put in the necessary time. It is much harder for the elite monkey grinding a bunch of tech tree's to make it to T10, than for the bad monkey who with singular focus climbs a tree(accidental metaphor there I guess). Honestly think this is less about discrimination against non elites and more about getting people to pay up to get free T10's in time to play ranked, more I think about it. 

Of course I thought discrimination at first hearing the news, but the more and more I think about it the more and more I think that this is because this is the ranked season configuration that will result in the most premium and doubloon purchases. You'll have players paying to rank up/get more T10 options and you'll have other players buying T8 and T7 premiums(to a lesser extent) for the season. Honestly like with the French crates situation, I'm not mad because we have to fund the game, I am proud to have supported the game, but I don't like being situationally manipulated into spending, I prefer WG making desirable premiums and then people buying them. I've also voluntarily bought doubloons to jump tiers but that was because I wanted to not because I needed too, to take part in my favorite game mode(I am in all likelihood going to have shell out x amount of dollars to get T10)

Also no people wouldn't complain nearly as much about other tiers. If you look at all the speculative threads, T10 wasn't seen as a legit possibility for so many reasons, wasn't even debated and we just had a T8 season. Is not having the same season twice in a row, not a legit grievance? I mean of course SOME people would complain no matter what because there's a group of people who don't want ranked at every tier, because of various personal reasons. For example I wouldn't want T6, I don't find my T6's to be really fun relative to the higher tiers(or even the Orion)despite having a ton of T6 options, others would have loved to have T6. Not being able to play and/or having to do the same season twice in a row are not just complaints that come down to a matter of personal taste and as a result T10 and T8 are naturally going to anger considerably more people than say T6,T7 or T9 would have done.

Edited by Aristotle83
  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×