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

Ranked and why it isn't

29 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

4
[FRR]
Members
40 posts
4,818 battles

When I hear the term "Ranked" I think of a position among your peers based on either win/losses or some other statistical criteria.

But Wargaming has decided that ranked is based on passing hurdles.  Ranked in this case, is not based on wins or win percentage but on patience to grind.  In this system, one could, theoretically, lose 30 matches in a row and not dip 1 ranking spot if they're in an irrevocable position.  With the piles upon piles of data that Wargaming uses for damage, mitigation, speed, arc, flight time, etc... they can't set up a system where players are actually ranked based on their gameplay?  It's 2018 and I'm asking a gaming company apply a rule that has been around for 2 decades.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers
2,817 posts
3,959 battles

i see ranked as a test of patience,a way for the peasant majority of the playerbase(me included) that is not good enough for typhoon league to get some steels and flags that say "hey i'm a good boy" without the team of CB and skills of CB.

in the end,ranked became a free for all game mode,it's not me and my buddies against the enemy.

it's ME against my "team"  and the enemy team.the dude that gets the biggest score can save a star and maybe win,the rest are gone.

  • Cool 1
  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
587 posts

One on One...Manni to Manno....two go in to the Ranked ring only one comes out!

I just like the 7 vs 7 instead of the 12 vs 11....plus sky cancer

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
580
[OPRAH]
[OPRAH]
Beta Testers
3,758 posts
12,414 battles

It is ranked because WG calls it that! One starts at a rank and attempts through 7 v 7 random battles to get to Rank !. Just because there is some other ranking system has no bearing on these Ranked Battles!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
1,690 posts
7,230 battles

I did a lot of research with all of ranking seasons starting from season 1.  I am too lazy to search for the thread with numbers in it, but essentially the ranking certainly is based on your skill.  I have not found a single person who was able to rank our with sub 50% WR in random games, but I have seen some of those play 1000+ games trying to rank out and failing. Occasionally (and very rarely) you will find a player who ranks out with 47% WR in ranked battles (and ranked WR is usually lower than your random WR simply because you face off vs better players in higher rankings) by playing over 1000 games, but those guys always have very solid stats in random games - I checked each one of those guys manually.

So, I found that simple mindless grinding can not get you to rank 1.  You actually have to be above average to make it.

Edited by Ramsalot

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4
[FRR]
Members
40 posts
4,818 battles
On 8/26/2018 at 3:58 PM, CAPTMUDDXX said:

It is ranked because WG calls it that! One starts at a rank and attempts through 7 v 7 random battles to get to Rank !. Just because there is some other ranking system has no bearing on these Ranked Battles!

Any sport

Any competitive game

Any business

Any (insert thing that uses a rank)

All of these things have a board where you can look at it and say my ranking is this and someone else is ranked that.  If at the end of the season, you have 1,000 people ranked #1, then your ranking system is garbage unless they're on the same team.

  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
580
[OPRAH]
[OPRAH]
Beta Testers
3,758 posts
12,414 battles

@Lord_Vakko there are thousands of people playing this game. I am certain that at seasons end there will be 1 at rank 1 who did better than all the rest who made it to rank 1. If you want a day by day leader board just ask developer @Sub_Octavian for one!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
370
[P2W]
[P2W]
Members
1,239 posts

Ranked can be absolutely infuriating but so can randoms. I do much prefer the 7 v 7 instead of 12 v 12, except the maps, some of which like (Sea of Fortune) the one with 2 caps overlapping are worse than an Ocean training room against 10 Hakuryus.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33
[BNKR]
[BNKR]
Members
159 posts
1,506 battles

I'm seeing a lot of commentary, mostly negative, about this season of ranked.  As a relative noob around these parts, has there been this much gnashing of teeth over previous ranked seasons?

Not being sarcastic or snarky.  Legitimately curious.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
855 posts
3,440 battles

Well ranked sort of works like ranked in MOBAs ect it seems to be lacking a elo rating. 

 

In most mobas you qualify, are put in a tier and have to climb your way out sort of like wgs setup. Both are flawed but they both are not bad systems. I think it would be alot better if we had more ranked players and they could ensure that you have better matchmaking. You can't really grind rank in a moba without being good. Your matches with others same rank against people of the same rank, so at some point you hit a skill wall that you can't climb out of. On wows that wall isn't really there because you can be carried to high tiers. Its alot harder to carry bads in a moba. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12
Members
68 posts
3,050 battles

I would consider myself very slightly above average in my gameplay and I started this ranked season with 2 wins and 15 losses. I would play a few and then take several hours or even wait until the next day. I am certainly no unicum but if it weren't for irrevocable ranks I would have thrown my computer in a lake by now because no matter how awful I play I should have been carried through some of them lol. This incredibly awful start combined with how burnt out I am on T10 means I will likely not be playing too much ships in the near future.

 

My issue is everyone was yelling at WG to PLEASE mix it up a bit for weeks before the season, plenty of time for them to change their mind. I just can't see how any of these choices will help them aside from the possibly short term monetary gains. I know of several people that are straight up letting their premium time expire and will not be playing for a while and some of them may not come back at all. Just my bit of complaining for the day, carry on with the constructive conversation I am sure this will be. :)

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
459
[WORX]
Members
1,634 posts
12,682 battles
On 8/26/2018 at 12:04 PM, Lord_Vakko said:

With the piles upon piles of data that Wargaming uses for damage, mitigation, speed, arc, flight time, etc... they can't set up a system where players are actually ranked based on their gameplay?  It's 2018 and I'm asking a gaming company apply a rule that has been around for 2 decades.

^^^ DOnt they have that already??? I thought it was called "The King of The Seas" Tournament. I think you have ranked entertainment function all skewed with the false impression its some how "competitive". You're right. Ranked has always been and will continue to be the must marathon grind you will partake in. However the system you're requesting is not for the type for the grind of Ranked. In other news,

Amazing someone has ranked out already, compared that with the rest of us who are trying our best I would say that is amazing feat

Edited by Navalpride33

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
248
[H_]
Members
691 posts
18 minutes ago, Navalpride33 said:

^^^ DOnt they have that already??? I thought it was called "The King of The Seas" Tournament. I think you have ranked entertainment function all skewed with the false impression its some how "competitive". You're right. Ranked has always been and will continue to be the must marathon grind you will partake in. However the system you're requesting is not for the type for the grind of Ranked. In other news,

Amazing someone has ranked out already, compared that with the rest of us who are trying are best I would say that is amazing feat

Many games use variations of a Combat Effectiveness (CE) algorithm that creates a "whole player" effectiveness metric; which, in reality is a ranking by class...  Those CE's place the player in like and similar matches.  A noob can't play an elite anywhere at any time....  The can be on the same team but CE must equal (with variations and allowances being allowed) CE before MM creates a drop.

Want to know where you stand in the game: look at you CE in and by class and type.  We have the data to do this.........not, the will I'm afraid.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,368
[-K-]
Members
5,061 posts
8,934 battles
On 8/26/2018 at 4:03 PM, Ramsalot said:

So, I found that simple mindless grinding can not get you to rank 1.  You actually have to be above average to make it.

Not necessarily true.  There have been players in past seasons who have ranked out with sub-50% win rates.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15
[SCREW]
Members
70 posts
6,502 battles
12 hours ago, Slumlord_Cheeto said:

Well ranked sort of works like ranked in MOBAs ect it seems to be lacking a elo rating. 

 

In most mobas you qualify, are put in a tier and have to climb your way out sort of like wgs setup. Both are flawed but they both are not bad systems. I think it would be alot better if we had more ranked players and they could ensure that you have better matchmaking. You can't really grind rank in a moba without being good. Your matches with others same rank against people of the same rank, so at some point you hit a skill wall that you can't climb out of. On wows that wall isn't really there because you can be carried to high tiers. Its alot harder to carry bads in a moba. 

League isn't nearly infuriating as WOWS its not like a better player can run back to fountain after he got feed grab 2 and half items then proceed to roflstomp until a surrender. WOWS ranked is utterly and completely flawed and its full of people who would rather save a star then play to win when the damn game finally drops to WOWP level of a player base those people who support WG useless and utterly incompetent stance of competitive will have themselves to blame

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
1,690 posts
7,230 battles
2 hours ago, Ace_04 said:

Not necessarily true.  There have been players in past seasons who have ranked out with sub-50% win rates.

Have you actually taken the time to check their stats?  Because I have.  They had sub-50% stats in ranked battles, their random win rate was above average, something like 55%+ iirc.  I put a spreadsheet together a while ago, it’s easy enough: you find all players that reached rank 1 with over 1000 battles.  Those are the “worst” players that ranked out, I did it for all seasons starting with season 1.  Guess what, all of them had sub 50% WR in ranked, and very solid stats in randoms.  The worst guy of them all had 54% WR in randoms.  There is not a single guy out there that was able to rank out with sub-50% random WR, but I found plenty of them that tried.

Edited by Ramsalot

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
401
[R-F]
Members
675 posts
6,159 battles

There was a player that ranked out last season with a 48.94% win rate and it only took him 282 battles.  He must have been a star saving machine.  But like @Ramsalot is saying, he's got a 68% win rate in randoms (61% in solo randoms).  He's not a bad player that ranked out through stubbornness.  He's an elite player that found a play style that worked for him at the expense of his team.

Edited by Brhinosaurus

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
1,690 posts
7,230 battles

I found that ranking out with sub-50% win rate in ranked happens for few reasons:

1: you go against higher quality opposition as you grind your way to the top, but as season draws to a close the better players rank out and opposition quality dilutes over time.  Hence you may have horrendous WR if you try to rank out early, and then catch up, but your overall WR will reflect the early losses.

2: you may have found a ship that you do better in during the ranked season.  For example you started ranked with cruisers and lost a bunch of battles, then caught up on destroyers. 

3: most often it’s combination of 1 and 2

I have first hand experience with the above, one season I did get all the way to the top.

Edited by Ramsalot

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,865
[CNO]
[CNO]
Members
3,771 posts
12,878 battles

Actually, ranked is a measure of both ability and grind.  In a way, ability and grind are a zero sum process.  The higher one's ability, the less the grind.  The lower one's ability, the more the grind.  Very good players rank out relatively quickly...their grind is much less because their ability is high (i.e., they are good!).  The average players can rank out but must play many more games (the grind).

If you think of rank in this fashion, as a combination of skill and patience (so to speak), then it is a proper measure.  It is a COMBINED measure.  

See a player with a good ranking, there are two factors.  Either that player is good...or patient.  Or...really...a combination of both. 

There is nothing wrong with this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17
[SPTR]
Members
114 posts
4,486 battles
14 hours ago, CatSnipah said:

I'm seeing a lot of commentary, mostly negative, about this season of ranked.  As a relative noob around these parts, has there been this much gnashing of teeth over previous ranked seasons?

Not being sarcastic or snarky.  Legitimately curious.

I think it is safe to say that just about every season of ranked has sparked its share of negative commentary.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
401
[R-F]
Members
675 posts
6,159 battles
9 minutes ago, Garrcia said:

I think it is safe to say that just about every season of ranked has sparked its share of negative commentary.

I think the main problem at this point is the fact that the last four seasons of competitive game play have been:

1. Current ranked season (almost exclusively tier 10)

2. Last Clan Wars season (tier 10)

3. Last ranked season (tier 10 starting at rank 10 on down)

4. Two Clan Wars seasons ago (tier 10)

 

Every tier has things for people to complain about, but we've been stuck complaining about the tier 10 stuff for four straight seasons.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
170
[CAST]
Members
1,157 posts
7,159 battles

All the above is well stated.  No bad player is getting carried to Rank 1.  Unfortunately, the grind is just too much in most cases for slightly above average players, especially when getting pulled back by below average players.  I find it hard playing to save a star.  I play to win and often save a star because of it, but the few games where I come in 2nd or 3rd in a losing game really pulls me back. 

If you were starting at a position where you needed 75 stars to rank out, even a 66% win rate  requires about 227 games without saving a star.  If you saved a star in half of your losses, the number of games is reduced to about 150.  A 55% win rate would require 750 games without saving a star.   By saving a star in half of your losses, the number of games required is reduced to about 340.  Saving stars is paramount in ranking out if you want to do it without burning out.

You have to find that carry ship that can deal enough damage to save a star with the side effect of helping edge the team into a win for enough games to advance towards the rank 1 goal.

Tier 10 has its negativity. But, at least most of the ships are pretty balanced.  Most players today have T10s because the game is quite mature.

Edited by Murcc

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
78
[SCREW]
Members
538 posts
5,463 battles

Only one way to make them change it.... just got to get enough players to boycott the event.

They will not do anything as long as we all keep playing it.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,026
[WOLF1]
Beta Testers
6,062 posts
9,185 battles

Ranked is a emotional maturity exercise.

  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×