Jump to content
You need to play a total of 5 battles to post in this section.
Happy668

Rank battle is pretty silly

21 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

258
[WOLF1]
Members
1,986 posts

basically is a measure of winning streaks

one can win 2, then lose 10, then win 3, then lose 20, can still advance, lol

  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
942
Members
4,461 posts
6,195 battles

This is odd.  I think I have YET to see a positive post regarding ranked. Why play it?  I really mean this. 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,604
[SALVO]
Members
16,670 posts
17,308 battles
39 minutes ago, Happy668 said:

basically is a measure of winning streaks

one can win 2, then lose 10, then win 3, then lose 20, can still advance, lol

If one can advance with those W/L numbers, one has to be an outstanding player to end up at top XP loser that often.  Frankly, that seems unlikely.  That's too many losses and too many times to have to play your heart out to end up at top loser.  It seems more likely to be around a 50% player, give or take a little, and regularly, though not always be top XP loser to save a star.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,604
[SALVO]
Members
16,670 posts
17,308 battles
6 minutes ago, dmckay said:

This is odd.  I think I have YET to see a positive post regarding ranked. Why play it?  I really mean this. 

Some of it's the challenge.  Some of it's for the Steel, though that's a new thing.  Some of it's the bragging rights of being a highly ranked player.  And the chance to get a special reward ship.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
258
[WOLF1]
Members
1,986 posts
21 minutes ago, Crucis said:

If one can advance with those W/L numbers, one has to be an outstanding player to end up at top XP loser that often.  Frankly, that seems unlikely.  That's too many losses and too many times to have to play your heart out to end up at top loser.  It seems more likely to be around a 50% player, give or take a little, and regularly, though not always be top XP loser to save a star.

with irrevocable stops, you don't have to be top loser, majority of players don't go to higher ranks anyway, so it's just a measure of short winning streaks

if someone is unlucky that he gets win-lose-win-lose pretty evenly, then he will never advance, and the win 2 lose 10 guy will advance, even though his win rate will be 20%

Edited by Happy668

Share this post


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

irrevocable stops at 12

 

but tbh, 6 and below is a measure of how long you are willing to play

 

only at r5 bracket does skill start to have an effect on whether you can advance further

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,604
[SALVO]
Members
16,670 posts
17,308 battles
4 minutes ago, Happy668 said:

with irrevocable stops, you don't have to be top loser, majority of players don't go to higher ranks anyway, so it's just a measure of short winning streaks

Irrevocable ranks only matter if you're at that rank and have 0 stars.  If you get to rank 10 or 11, you can still damned well lose a bunch of stars a fall back to rank 12.  :Smile_facepalm:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
136
[BBC]
Members
908 posts
12,243 battles

think he is referring to the  starting ranks like 23  or whatever you dont lose a star on a loss i think,  that all stops when you get higher in the ranks. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
942
Members
4,461 posts
6,195 battles
32 minutes ago, Crucis said:

Some of it's the challenge.  Some of it's for the Steel, though that's a new thing.  Some of it's the bragging rights of being a highly ranked player.  And the chance to get a special reward ship.

OK. Tks

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
136
[BBC]
Members
908 posts
12,243 battles

yeah  going from rank 12 to rank  1  would take like 40+ wins in a row not gonna happen....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,489
[PSP]
Members
6,043 posts
8,585 battles
1 hour ago, Happy668 said:

basically is a measure of winning streaks

one can win 2, then lose 10, then win 3, then lose 20, can still advance, lol

Even with irrevocable levels you are not going to advance if you consistently lose more than you win, unless you are the top scorer on your team nearly every time. If you are the top scorer on your team then, of course, you will advance as you will never fall back, only move forward, albeit only in disparate and small increments.

"Ranks 23 to 17 as well as Ranks 15, 12 and 1 are irrevocable. Between Ranks 23–20, players don’t lose a star for a defeat"

Once you hit rank 20 you will find things a bit more difficult.

"For Ranks 23–11, an additional bonus star is given when you progress to the next rank"

Once you hit rank 10 there is no free lunch anymore and things get even more difficult. It's easy to fall back to the bottom of 12 -- I've done it two times already this season from rank 9. Quite obviously I've reached my max level. I am cutting my losses and just staying at 10 and calling it a day.

 

Edited by Snargfargle

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,059
[GWG]
[GWG]
Alpha Tester, In AlfaTesters
15,219 posts
8,804 battles

The team is too much of a factor for what is supposed to be about the individual. The really need to change the factor that decides if some one advances. A system where the top 7, maybe 10,  base experience earners get a star would reduce but not reduce the team factor and still reward doing well. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
201
[-BRS-]
Members
877 posts
7,324 battles
33 minutes ago, BrushWolf said:

The team is too much of a factor...

yeppers.… just went 1-8 tonight for ranked. Didn't lose any stars in those 8 losses... in 1 game, I saved my star with 28k damage done. I play to win btw. 

Too many people try from the start to save a star, by yolo-ing for torp kills or doing trades. Not enough people playing for the win... counter-productive. Too many chiefs, not enough Indians.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
461
[LOU1]
Members
2,895 posts
8,004 battles
1 hour ago, dmckay said:

This is odd.  I think I have YET to see a positive post regarding ranked. Why play it?  I really mean this. 

Not really odd.  There have been several, but they tend to either not get much attention or get quashed.  When someone has posted something positive about Ranked battles, there have usually been some pretty strong responses.  Also, people are more prone to talk about negative reactions than positive reactions.  In Marketing it used to be said that a person would tell about three people (each of them telling three more)  if they had a positive experience and nine (each of them telling nine more) if they had a negative experience.  I think the bottom line is if people really didn't like it, they wouldn't play it at all.  But they do play it up, until the point where they get nothing a value to them out of it, which is fine.  and that's what it is here fr - another form of entertainment in WOWS.  When you are no longer entertained, switch to something else.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
855 posts
3,474 battles

You don't really have to be a top player to advance in ranked, you have to be a BB player that farms damage at the expense of your team. 

 

I have seen some of the most potatoe BBs keep a star because they played in the rear, let there teammates all die and then yolo'ed in close for some big shots maybe a ram before dying themselves and retaining there star. 

 

This is why the higher you advance you start seeing 4-5 BBs per side because people are only interested in trying to keep there star, and the system is flawed.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
87
[-BSS-]
Members
386 posts
5,959 battles
2 hours ago, dmckay said:

This is odd.  I think I have YET to see a positive post regarding ranked. Why play it?  I really mean this. 

I really enjoy 7v7 so I find ranked to be my favourite game type since clan battles is limited to a relatively small number of hours a week and no guarantee to play.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
139
[1NJS]
Members
424 posts

when you have to get 5+ wins in a row then yes rank is kid of silly.  And after rank 12 you have to win out to get to one.  Yes that is silly.  Unless you can play hours a day and have 60 or 70 percent win rate you will never rank out.  

I like the competitive aspect but why bother with rank when it is that difficult?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,059
[GWG]
[GWG]
Alpha Tester, In AlfaTesters
15,219 posts
8,804 battles
15 minutes ago, jags_domain said:

when you have to get 5+ wins in a row then yes rank is kid of silly.  And after rank 12 you have to win out to get to one.  Yes that is silly.  Unless you can play hours a day and have 60 or 70 percent win rate you will never rank out.  

I like the competitive aspect but why bother with rank when it is that difficult?

I haven't played a single ranked match this time so far but the reason to play is now steel and if you get into the upper ranks copper. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers
236 posts
5,819 battles

Playing Ranked the last 2 season has been painful, tier 8 is not fun for ranked and tier 10 likely be worse if I chose not to stop at rank 15. It took 24 matches to move 4 ranks this season but last season took me 40+ matches to move same 4 ranks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
587
[ARRGG]
Members
4,681 posts
7,503 battles
3 hours ago, dmckay said:

This is odd.  I think I have YET to see a positive post regarding ranked. Why play it?  I really mean this. 

If you play ranked for its different meta 7 on 7 same tier in a ship you really like set up as good as it can be and playing for the fun of it with no thought of getting to rank 1... then it can be a positive experience making you a better player

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×