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

Time to remove the no lost star to losing team top player

53 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

183
[NOOBS]
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
470 posts
11,929 battles

I see people playing to NOT lose a star opposed to trying to win.  It's time to make a loss a loss in Ranked play.  

  1. Multiple DD's racing to a cap to pad the stat
  2. BB's disengage 
  3. HE spam Cruisers just looking to put as many people on fire as possible instead of finishing off an opponent.

I've seen it all this go round, and with the mission in place...omg the lack of team play.

  • Cool 4
  • Boring 1
  • Bad 13

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
76
[HAG]
Beta Testers
318 posts
4,074 battles

And yet if everyone was playing to be the best the team would probably win

Dds should cap and cap fast 

Cruisers should light fires 

And

BBs should know when to disengage so they can fight better later 

  • Cool 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
567 posts
75 battles

Or you can wake up and realize that ranked is competing against the red team and the green players since you all are climbing over each other for ranked positioning. If I was wrong, you'd have the same team mates match after match. Try to adopt the proper paradigm that defense (keeping your star on a losing team) is as equally important a strategy as offense. 

Or you can also wake up to the reality that all the major activities (capping, doing damage, living longer so you can be there at the end to turn a loss into a win, etc. etc.) are the same exact things you need to do to win matches or get top spot on a losing team. And if everyone on your team played as well as the top player, you would have won, so you blaming the top player is foolish. 

And at 9000 games played, your brain should have gone through the learning curve in this game to the point of being Jedi WoWs master, but something is preventing you from even being a 50% player. You are not going to keep stars or progress far through ranked if you do not have the intellectual capacity to learn from your mistakes and be truly honest about your shortcomings and figure out how to overcome them. 

Edited by A_Crying_Hipster
  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
245
[HC]
[HC]
Beta Testers
1,345 posts
9,543 battles

Sound like any other day in Random to me.

When the game launched, 40% of the players were good, 40% actually had a clue, the last 20% were clueless. (this was from the alpha and beta testers learning before launch and being more interested what they were doing as a whole)

With new players coming into the game, and old players leaving, 10% of the players are good, 20% actually have a clue, the last 70% are clueless and are unwilling to learn how to be better.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
393
Members
2,385 posts
7,690 battles
25 minutes ago, justdags said:

And yet if everyone was playing to be the best the team would probably win

Exactly, they are playing for their best, and not for what is best for the team. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,208
[GWG]
[GWG]
Alpha Tester, In AlfaTesters
15,619 posts
9,014 battles

What they need to do is remove the team as a factor in gaining stars. Get rid of losing stars and the top 7 performers by the true base experience, no buff for being on the winning team,advance, winning & losing would only impact net earnings.

  • Cool 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
670
[KP]
Beta Testers
1,834 posts
11,180 battles

There were lots of complaints about being highest on the board of the losing side, and it was taking people to long for people to rank out, so they changed it.

When they did change it, it also changed how people viewed the game, "well if were not going to win I better just do what I can so I don't lose a star" and unfortunately by changing what they should do normally to save loosing a star, alters how the game results might have been.

Since this is the ninth season WG would have a good indication of what the players want, and you would find being the best player on the loosing side and not loosing a star, makes it easier to rank up, so I do not think it will be changed any time soon.

Winners make it happen, losers let it happen.

Edited by CriMiNaL__

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,793
[SALVO]
Members
17,055 posts
17,693 battles
43 minutes ago, BrushWolf said:

What they need to do is remove the team as a factor in gaining stars. Get rid of losing stars and the top 7 performers by the true base experience, no buff for being on the winning team,advance, winning & losing would only impact net earnings.

I've said it before.  They should change how stars are rewarded thusly:

After the battle and the base XP is awarded, they should group the 14 players up into a single list, ordered by base XP.

The top 7 base XP earning players, win or lose, would gain a star.

For the bottom 7 base XP earning players, if you were on the winning team, you wouldn't lose a star nor would you win one.

And if you were in the bottom 7 base XP earning players and on the losing team, then you'd lose a star.

Because winning affects the base XP earned, it would probably be rare that more than 1 or 2 players from the losing team would crack into the top 7 base XP earners.  At the same time, there might be times when the losing team was so bad that their top base XP earner received less base XP than the lowest base XP earner on the winning team.  This is the fault of having the highest base XP earner on the losing team lose no star.  You should have to play well to earn that right, not simply be the least worst loser.  The system I describe above would require anyone on the losing team to play well to get a reward, just as it would require anyone on the winning team to play fairly well to get a reward.  After all, even on the winning team, if you can't earn more base XP than someone on the losing team, you must not have contributed much to your team and don't deserve a star, but at least being on the winning team would earn you not losing one.

Anyways, that's my suggestion for this.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,208
[GWG]
[GWG]
Alpha Tester, In AlfaTesters
15,619 posts
9,014 battles
2 minutes ago, Crucis said:

I've said it before.  They should change how stars are rewarded thusly:

After the battle and the base XP is awarded, they should group the 14 players up into a single list, ordered by base XP.

The top 7 base XP earning players, win or lose, would gain a star.

For the bottom 7 base XP earning players, if you were on the winning team, you wouldn't lose a star nor would you win one.

And if you were in the bottom 7 base XP earning players and on the losing team, then you'd lose a star.

Because winning affects the base XP earned, it would probably be rare that more than 1 or 2 players from the losing team would crack into the top 7 base XP earners.  At the same time, there might be times when the losing team was so bad that their top base XP earner received less base XP than the lowest base XP earner on the winning team.  This is the fault of having the highest base XP earner on the losing team lose no star.  You should have to play well to earn that right, not simply be the least worst loser.  The system I describe above would require anyone on the losing team to play well to get a reward, just as it would require anyone on the winning team to play fairly well to get a reward.  After all, even on the winning team, if you can't earn more base XP than someone on the losing team, you must not have contributed much to your team and don't deserve a star, but at least being on the winning team would earn you not losing one.

Anyways, that's my suggestion for this.

Great minds think alike it seems. They could pull the winning experience buff out for purposes of calculating the top seven.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,737
[INTEL]
Members
8,581 posts
25,683 battles

I've stopped Ranked for a while after 2 100K 2/3 kill damage games in Shim in which the opposing team complimented me, but we lost. It just drives me to despair. If "top 7 players" get a star ideas were implemented, I'd have two stars. @Crucis' idea is really good. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,793
[SALVO]
Members
17,055 posts
17,693 battles
39 minutes ago, CriMiNaL__ said:

There were lots of complaints about being highest on the board of the losing side, and it was taking people to long for people to rank out, so they changed it.

When they did change it, it also changed how people viewed the game, "well if we're not going to win I better just do what I can so I don't lose a star" and unfortunately by changing what they should do normally to save loosing losing a star, alters how the game results might have been.

Since this is the ninth season WG would have a good indication of what the players want, and you would find being the best player on the loosing side and not loosing a star, makes it easier to rank up, so I do not think it will be changed any time soon.

Winners make it happen, losers let it happen.

What a bunch of pseudo-psychological nonsense.

As for the no  star lost stuff you mention, I have no problem with people who are teams that are obviously going to lose doing their best to salvage what they can out of a loss.  The problem I have is with people who would play to not lose a star right from the start of a battle.  Not losing a star doesn't advance you in rank.  It's just a good way to mitigate the occasional battle where you end up on a craptacular team that seems to do its best to find ways to lose.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
426
[STP]
[STP]
Beta Testers
2,036 posts
11,210 battles

I kiiiiind need agreed because if you play as a suport cruiser (raday hydro stay alive without be nuked by bb) is hard to make a lot points, the game not reward spot and suport...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,793
[SALVO]
Members
17,055 posts
17,693 battles

 

5 minutes ago, BrushWolf said:

Great minds think alike it seems. They could pull the winning experience buff out for purposes of calculating the top seven.

No, they shouldn't do that.  Winning should still matter.  That's why my idea is structured the way it is.  Winning teams would always place more players in the top 7 than losing teams.  And to gain a star when you're on the winning team would require less effort than gaining a star if you were on the losing team.  Playing fairly well could get you a star if you won, but not if you lost.  If you lose, you should have to have played very well to crack into the top 7.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,208
[GWG]
[GWG]
Alpha Tester, In AlfaTesters
15,619 posts
9,014 battles
9 minutes ago, Crucis said:

 

No, they shouldn't do that.  Winning should still matter.  That's why my idea is structured the way it is.  Winning teams would always place more players in the top 7 than losing teams.  And to gain a star when you're on the winning team would require less effort than gaining a star if you were on the losing team.  Playing fairly well could get you a star if you won, but not if you lost.  If you lose, you should have to have played very well to crack into the top 7.

I meant only for the calculation of who the top 7 base exp players are and leave it for the win/loss but I see where you are coming from. Thinking about it more I like your idea, no more being a potato and still gaining a star.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
670
[KP]
Beta Testers
1,834 posts
11,180 battles
8 minutes ago, Crucis said:

The problem I have is with people who would play to not lose a star right from the start of a battle.  Not losing a star doesn't advance you in rank

Where did I say it advanced you, by not loosing a star your score doesn't change so if you win the next one your in front, ty for the spelling correcting I see that was your main goal, and if you take your comment about the problem part, you just repeated what I wrote but in a dumb'd down version, but you know what, it is what it is, you seem a bit jaded by the whole ranked experience.  

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,793
[SALVO]
Members
17,055 posts
17,693 battles
1 hour ago, CriMiNaL__ said:

Where did I say it advanced you, by not loosing a star your score doesn't change so if you win the next one your in front, ty for the spelling correcting I see that was your main goal, and if you take your comment about the problem part, you just repeated what I wrote but in a dumb'd down version, but you know what, it is what it is, you seem a bit jaded by the whole ranked experience.  

 

No, in fact it wasn't.  If it was, I'd have said so in words.

As for the rest, no, I didn't dumb it down.  If you think I said the same thing, then all I did was make it clearer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
670
[KP]
Beta Testers
1,834 posts
11,180 battles
1 minute ago, Crucis said:

all I did was make it clearer.

So the same thing but dumb'd down, I get it, TY for your input.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
398
[R-F1]
Beta Testers
1,868 posts
6,855 battles

op might as well have entitled this thread "time to make even fewer people want to play ranked."

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,793
[SALVO]
Members
17,055 posts
17,693 battles
49 minutes ago, CriMiNaL__ said:

So the same thing but dumb'd down, I get it, TY for your input.

I disagree.  Some people write things in ways that they think is oh-so-intelligent when all they've really done is bury the point in a bunch of pseudo-intellectual mumbo-jumbo.  That's what you did.  Writing something more clearly and concisely does NOT equate to "dumbing it down", and it certainly didn't in this case.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
632
[HEROS]
Members
1,428 posts
12,017 battles

so let me get this straight...

  The one person on the other team that busted their buns or at least most likely did the least number of things wrong, or maybe just lucky.  So many possible reasons as to why they were the top scorer on the other team.  I've managed to get that kept star more than a few times and every time it's happened I did earn that.  7 ship teams, very unforgiving of bad plays.

I'm thankful that there's a match rule there that on occasion rewards me for being the best player on the worse team and doesn't penalize my rank standing for one match.   

Stop being so petty and mean over a multiplayer online PvP game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
670
[KP]
Beta Testers
1,834 posts
11,180 battles
11 minutes ago, Crucis said:

I disagree.  Some people write things in ways that they think is oh-so-intelligent when all they've really done is bury the point in a bunch of pseudo-intellectual mumbo-jumbo.  That's what you did.  Writing something more clearly and concisely does NOT equate to "dumbing it down", and it certainly didn't in this case.  

I apologise to you if you did not understand fully what was written, and I'm glad you corrected it in a dumb'd down version for others to understand, I'm also sorry people do not write to your standards, but you seem adamant, in pointing this out to people, for no reason other than I'm guessing to act superior?  I fail to see where your actually contributing to this discussion by continuing to debate someone about how they wrote a sentence, or is it in your nature to simply act like a tool.

You know I just read your sig, tool it is

Edited by CriMiNaL__

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,046
Members
3,782 posts
14,033 battles
3 hours ago, HooplaJones said:

I see people playing to NOT lose a star opposed to trying to win.  It's time to make a loss a loss in Ranked play.  

  1. Multiple DD's racing to a cap to pad the stat
  2. BB's disengage 
  3. HE spam Cruisers just looking to put as many people on fire as possible instead of finishing off an opponent

How do you know that players are playing to NOT lose a star? It makes no sense to go all out to keep a star over winning and gaining a star. You don't advance by playing to lose. By not losing a star when you rate number one when your team loses, WG is rewarding you for doing your best to help the team win.

#1 The DDs are doing their job by capping. Y'know, the goal of any battle.

#2 I don't know what you mean by this.

#3 Horsepucky! No player, no matter what they're driving, is going to pass up on finishing off a almost dead Red.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
183
[NOOBS]
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
470 posts
11,929 battles

Well I said screw it and just played to not lose a star, an hour later I went to tier 10 from 13.

 

 

 

shot-18.05.05_16.47.51-0973.jpg

shot-18.05.05_16.59.53-0330.jpg

shot-18.05.05_15.16.34-0359.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,065
[ABDA]
Beta Testers
16,176 posts
11,693 battles
On 5/5/2018 at 10:31 AM, HooplaJones said:

I see people playing to NOT lose a star opposed to trying to win.  It's time to make a loss a loss in Ranked play.  

  1. Multiple DD's racing to a cap to pad the stat
  2. BB's disengage 
  3. HE spam Cruisers just looking to put as many people on fire as possible instead of finishing off an opponent.

I've seen it all this go round, and with the mission in place...omg the lack of team play.

I wont lie, when I saw what the DD was doing in the game I just played, I told my team the game was lost and that I was playing for my star.  I kept my star.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×