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

5 days left to Ranked season

20 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

Members
181 posts
1,591 battles

Are you all salty enough?

Are you trolling hard?

Are you losing on purpose?

Are you upset when you lose?

I have talked to many player about Ranked and found it interesting nobody cares about this Mode and play it to a safe place and give up trying to go higher.

What is the actual point of a mode where you win one and lose three?

It is supposed to be Team Play but never are there "Teams" That do what is necessary.

The Randomness of the "Team Composition" Makes for Individual players doing what they want,not what is good for the Team. 

My answer to this is Allow 7 member Divisions in Ranked. This will allow "TeamWork".

If you don't have 7 Friends then I am SAD for You.

Lose the Safe Zones Out of the Game Mode.

Everyone starts at the 23 no matter where you ended the previous season.

Ranked is "Competitive" Let the Teams Compete.

Those who can't hack it will be left in the Dust "Nobody Cares about them"

 

  • Boring 1
  • Bad 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
77
[WOLF2]
Members
163 posts
10,962 battles

I usually play ranked when I can around work and home duties etc. for the whole season.  This time my heart just wasn’t in it.   Got to rank 9 like 3 weeks ago and haven’t been back in since.  In part because I’m just so burned out on playing tier 10 for everything.  I’m still grinding for the legendaries but ranked doesn’t seem all that conducive for that.  I saw a thread the other day that next season will be tier 5?  If so, I’ll be there with bells on!!!

Edited by RumpledSteelskins

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,581
[-K-]
WoWS Wiki Editor, Members, Supertester, WoWS Community Contributors
4,732 posts
15,377 battles

Ranked out 3 weeks ago.  Salt is gone.  I miss it :/.  I don't know what's worse...  the fact that I miss it or how I much I hate the mode itself LOL.  I am really looking forward to the Ranked Sprints that are coming up though.  Can't wait to div with some friends and experience the battle together.

Edited by Lord_Zath

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
496
[FML]
Members
1,767 posts
10,138 battles
9 minutes ago, Nikolay_Kuznetsov_ said:

Are you all salty enough?

Are you trolling hard?

Are you losing on purpose?

Are you upset when you lose?

I have talked to many player about Ranked and found it interesting nobody cares about this Mode and play it to a safe place and give up trying to go higher.

What is the actual point of a mode where you win one and lose three?

It is supposed to be Team Play but never are there "Teams" That do what is necessary.

The Randomness of the "Team Composition" Makes for Individual players doing what they want,not what is good for the Team. 

My answer to this is Allow 7 member Divisions in Ranked. This will allow "TeamWork".

If you don't have 7 Friends then I am SAD for You.

Lose the Safe Zones Out of the Game Mode.

Everyone starts at the 23 no matter where you ended the previous season.

Ranked is "Competitive" Let the Teams Compete.

Those who can't hack it will be left in the Dust "Nobody Cares about them"

 

We have clan battles already, so no to your highly innovative idea. 

 

Also, lost 11 of my last 13. Back to R5, again. Looks like I won’t rank out this season. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
496
[FML]
Members
1,767 posts
10,138 battles
Just now, Lord_Zath said:

Ranked out 3 weeks ago.  Salt is gone.  I miss it :/

Jealous. Want to trade??!? ;-)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,581
[-K-]
WoWS Wiki Editor, Members, Supertester, WoWS Community Contributors
4,732 posts
15,377 battles
1 minute ago, UltimateNewbie said:

Jealous. Want to trade??!? ;-)

I wouldn't trade all the stress, fear, and concentration it required for anything.  The worst part is when it's over you miss it...  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
2,481 posts
2,336 battles
Spoiler

 

 

Gratz to those who ranked out. 

Edited by Yoshiblue

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,412
[PNG]
Supertester, Beta Testers
5,664 posts
6,472 battles

I had fun this Ranked season. Better than last by far. Probably because I one tricked this season.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
2,481 posts
2,336 battles

I've only done T-8 rank thus far and felt like I cheesed it by using mainly Alabama. Very fun times. I feel I should challenge myself next time by using Mogami/Atago or a T-8 destroyer when the next T-8 ranked rolls around though. Would require more thinking maybe.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
661
[WOLF1]
[WOLF1]
Members
2,871 posts
1,338 battles
41 minutes ago, Nikolay_Kuznetsov_ said:

My answer to this is Allow 7 member Divisions in Ranked. This will allow "TeamWork".

Ranked is "Competitive" Let the Teams Compete.

If you want full-team competitive battles, there's already a mode tailor-made for that.  It's called Clan-Battles.

They just need to remove Save-A-Star.  Now, the next ranked coming allows 2-man divisions, that's fine, imo.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
181 posts
1,591 battles
1 minute ago, mavfin87 said:

If you want full-team competitive battles, there's already a mode tailor-made for that.  It's called Clan-Battles.

They just need to remove Save-A-Star.  Now, the next ranked coming allows 2-man divisions, that's fine, imo.

 

Yes but ranked doesn't need a Clan membership to participate.

There are some players who don't like Joining Clans but have many friends who would love to division up in ranked instead of sync dropping.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[LHG]
Members
1,657 posts
4,930 battles
36 minutes ago, Nikolay_Kuznetsov_ said:

Are you all salty enough?

Are you trolling hard?

Are you losing on purpose?

Are you upset when you lose?

I have talked to many player about Ranked and found it interesting nobody cares about this Mode and play it to a safe place and give up trying to go higher.

What is the actual point of a mode where you win one and lose three?

It is supposed to be Team Play but never are there "Teams" That do what is necessary.

The Randomness of the "Team Composition" Makes for Individual players doing what they want,not what is good for the Team. 

My answer to this is Allow 7 member Divisions in Ranked. This will allow "TeamWork".

If you don't have 7 Friends then I am SAD for You.

Lose the Safe Zones Out of the Game Mode.

Everyone starts at the 23 no matter where you ended the previous season.

Ranked is "Competitive" Let the Teams Compete.

Those who can't hack it will be left in the Dust "Nobody Cares about them"

Well, you have some vocal people who dislike the mode, others who dislike it compared to Clan Wars and then there are others very much appreciate it and want it to be healthy and continue. 

If I'm in a situation where I am losing three games to every one I win, well that's on me.  Half of the time, the quality of the team I am on will be better than the team I'm facing so if I'm losing more games than I'm winning, the only common point between those games is that I'm playing them. That's a clue for me to work on getting better, not blaming the game mode.  

I'm very much looking forward to the use of Divisions in Ranked Sprint which will be coming out is a week or two so we'll see how that goes.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
1,343 posts
504 battles
8 minutes ago, Yoshiblue said:

Ironically my selection of T-Vs are battleships, haha!

9UmtK6l.gif

DDs baby  DDs....
and Konigsburg///// it can cit most tier 5 BBs...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
661
[WOLF1]
[WOLF1]
Members
2,871 posts
1,338 battles
6 minutes ago, Nikolay_Kuznetsov_ said:

Yes but ranked doesn't need a Clan membership to participate.

There are some players who don't like Joining Clans but have many friends who would love to division up in ranked instead of sync dropping.

So make something like the wolf clans. They're not really clans like you're talking about.  They just share the oil and the perks and they also can do clan battles.  If you allow 7-man divs in Ranked, then single players won't even be able to do anything but be cannon fodder.

i.e. don't do that to Ranked, because then it'll *effectively* be all 7-man battles all the time, no room for singles or doubles.

I don't think that's a good idea.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
661
[WOLF1]
[WOLF1]
Members
2,871 posts
1,338 battles
6 minutes ago, neptunes_wrath said:

9UmtK6l.gif

DDs baby  DDs....
and Konigsburg///// it can cit most tier 5 BBs...

I suspect T5 Ranked will be mostly a BB-DD show, and cruisers are mainly targets.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
181 posts
1,591 battles
2 minutes ago, mavfin87 said:

So make something like the wolf clans. They're not really clans like you're talking about.  They just share the oil and the perks and they also can do clan battles.  If you allow 7-man divs in Ranked, then single players won't even be able to do anything but be cannon fodder.

i.e. don't do that to Ranked, because then it'll *effectively* be all 7-man battles all the time, no room for singles or doubles.

I don't think that's a good idea.

A clan is a clan and 7 v 7 is good game metric so the individuals suffer no loss there. If you don't have 7 friends that is sad.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
60
[TNG]
[TNG]
Members
282 posts
15,144 battles
1 hour ago, Lord_Zath said:

Ranked out 3 weeks ago.  Salt is gone.  I miss it :/.  I don't know what's worse...  the fact that I miss it or how I much I hate the mode itself LOL.  I am really looking forward to the Ranked Sprints that are coming up though.  Can't wait to div with some friends and experience the battle together.

I agree, I enjoy Ranked too.... I guess we are gluttons for punishment.  My Gremy….ready to hunt dds in tier 5.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
110
[WOLF8]
Beta Testers
491 posts
4,287 battles

Quit ranked long ago... not worth it.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
437
[SAA]
Members
859 posts
27,322 battles

This is from a player named Syndicated.  By far this has been the best idea I have seen for dealing with how Rank is implemented. 

So once more it is another season, and the same complaints flood the forums in droves.   While someone is always going to be upset, the bottom line is that it is clear from every poll, general forum and game chat, dischord, and ts conversations etc that the majority (ie >50%) of the player base find rank too frustrating or painful as compared to other game modes.  Multiple causes are cited relating to each person's personal experience.   Yet the over-arching pain continues to exist, and the solution is WG dangling every better rewards for playing has once again failed to produce the desired result of getting players to play the mode.   Season after season WGs own numbers show that fewer players participate in ranked battles and fewer ranked battles are being played.  Despite the overall number of server population increasing, and random/co-op battles played going up.   For those of us who play the mode the queue times increasing each season at each league is a clear indication of the state of the mode.

 

If you are getting an ever shrinking volume of participation in a mode while you have an increasing number of players, clearly something is wrong with the mode.   The blame that it had been shifted to tier 10 and thus had fewer participants doesn't hold as the number of tier 10 players is now higher than it was last season, yet the population is smaller than it was by this point last season.  All this despite a rework of the rewards so ranking out isn't even necessary to get steel.

 

So once more to bring attention to the elephant in the room that nearly all the other gripes which we see ultimately circle back to, the yo-yo which is out of the players control.   Psychology teaches us that most humans are able to handle extreme setbacks and difficulties when they feel they have some for of actionable control on the situation, and can reliably cite why what they did or did not do caused their discomfort.   Currently the ranked mode control that msot people see as the only part that they have control over is hitting the battle button or not.   This is less than an ideal situation for a game developer.   You want players to feel that they have purchase within the game itself.    However the complaints about the save a star players, the afkers/tkers/griefers, and general random teammates nearly all universally trace back to the anger and frustration that a player experiences when they see a star that often they had to work hard to earn, perhaps even solo carry a team in a previous game, suddenly disappear because in the next game they had a random group assigned to them which didn't work as well as the random group on the other side.   In other words ranked is mixing the worst elements of skill based determination with the worst elements of RNG.   Players in general would have less negative responses to ranked outcomes determined by random dice rolls (ie you hit the battle button and a random dice roll says whether you gain a star, keep a star, or lose a star), as at least then players would not have felt robber by another player but by random chance (which study and study shows is something that people can more readily accept).   

 

So the problem is that clearly WG would prefer rank to remain a team game format (as opposed to a 1v1 solo or free-for-all mode), yet reducing the impact of RNG or of losing will more readily let some players rank out (thus reducing the player population and total number of games necessary to rank out) which is again something clearly contrary to the desired result.   The solution to keeping this team win based game mode with generally long grind, while simultaneously reducing the pain of the grind has been suggested multiple times (I think this is personally my 5th season of pointing this out), and I am going to put it out there yet again.  Ranked star assignments should simply be post game before win bonus is assigned to each players XP, the 14 players are aligned from highest XP to lowest. 

 

With stars being given as follows*

  1. Gain a star regardless of team
  2. Winning team gain a star, losing team keep a star
  3. Winning team gain a star, losing team keep a star
  4. Winning team gain a star, losing team keep a star
  5. Winning team gain a star, losing team keep a star
  6. Winning team gain a star, losing team keep a star
  7. Winning team gain a star, losing team keep a star
  8. Losing team lose a star, winning team keep a star
  9. Losing team lose a star, winning team keep a star
  10. Losing team lose a star, winning team keep a star
  11. Losing team lose a star, winning team keep a star
  12. Losing team lose a star, winning team keep a star
  13. Losing team lose a star, winning team keep a star
  14. Lose a star regardless of team**

*Situations of ties, both/all players gain/lose a star as according to their team's placement.

**Minimum score of 100 XP required to gain or keep a star, <100XP automatically loses a star as afk, even if there is a lower score)

 

The result is simply that unlike the current system with every game awarding 7 stars, taking away 6 stars, and allowing 1 kept star (ie a system designed to create great fluctuation), On average only about 7 stars will be given and/or taken and 7 stars will be kept.   Players will have far more static placement, and people at or about their skill level maximum will see much slower slides and climbs.   The yo-yo effect will be gone.   Thus even if losing every match in a night, and not being the best player, often a person won't lose a rank at least.  Just as if they are at their skill ceiling, even if winning every game in a night they likely won't climb a rank. 

 

The system still rewards spammed games and good play, but with less frustration and "helpless feeling;' factor.  Super unicums who top their team every battle can still gain stars, even when MM screws them with a terrible team.  Serial potatoes who drag their team down will have a much tougher time climbing to a level beyond their skill and more quickly be dispatched.  Heck doing this means you can remove "irrevocable" ranks entirely.  WG still gets what it wants, a game spam fest to burn off player's excess flags and put the pressure on people to spend real world money, and players get to feel like they make actual progress and if not ranking out are getting some sort of numerical assignment of their skill level.

 

 

TL;DR:
The simplest change to reduce ranked complaints is to make most of the root causes of the complaints go away: the pain of the yo-yo effect (gain a star lose a star, gain a rank lose a rank), make stars more difficult to get but also more difficult to lose.  Make it about how well a player does when they win or lose, not ONLY about whether they win or top the losing team.  Thus allowing players to play until they hit their skill ceiling without the pain and frustration of the up and down effect.   The player base has spoken and quite clearly those who draw excitement from the anticipation of the sudden ups and downs of stars are in the minority.   Most players would rather play with more reliable ability to predict the outcome of their next match.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[LHG]
Members
1,657 posts
4,930 battles
1 hour ago, Turbotush said:

This is from a player named Syndicated.  By far this has been the best idea I have seen for dealing with how Rank is implemented. 

So once more it is another season, and the same complaints flood the forums in droves.   While someone is always going to be upset, the bottom line is that it is clear from every poll, general forum and game chat, dischord, and ts conversations etc that the majority (ie >50%) of the player base find rank too frustrating or painful as compared to other game modes.  Multiple causes are cited relating to each person's personal experience.   Yet the over-arching pain continues to exist, and the solution is WG dangling every better rewards for playing has once again failed to produce the desired result of getting players to play the mode.   Season after season WGs own numbers show that fewer players participate in ranked battles and fewer ranked battles are being played.  Despite the overall number of server population increasing, and random/co-op battles played going up.   For those of us who play the mode the queue times increasing each season at each league is a clear indication of the state of the mode.

If you are getting an ever shrinking volume of participation in a mode while you have an increasing number of players, clearly something is wrong with the mode.   The blame that it had been shifted to tier 10 and thus had fewer participants doesn't hold as the number of tier 10 players is now higher than it was last season, yet the population is smaller than it was by this point last season.  All this despite a rework of the rewards so ranking out isn't even necessary to get steel.

So once more to bring attention to the elephant in the room that nearly all the other gripes which we see ultimately circle back to, the yo-yo which is out of the players control.   Psychology teaches us that most humans are able to handle extreme setbacks and difficulties when they feel they have some for of actionable control on the situation, and can reliably cite why what they did or did not do caused their discomfort.   Currently the ranked mode control that msot people see as the only part that they have control over is hitting the battle button or not.   This is less than an ideal situation for a game developer.   You want players to feel that they have purchase within the game itself.    However the complaints about the save a star players, the afkers/tkers/griefers, and general random teammates nearly all universally trace back to the anger and frustration that a player experiences when they see a star that often they had to work hard to earn, perhaps even solo carry a team in a previous game, suddenly disappear because in the next game they had a random group assigned to them which didn't work as well as the random group on the other side.   In other words ranked is mixing the worst elements of skill based determination with the worst elements of RNG.   Players in general would have less negative responses to ranked outcomes determined by random dice rolls (ie you hit the battle button and a random dice roll says whether you gain a star, keep a star, or lose a star), as at least then players would not have felt robber by another player but by random chance (which study and study shows is something that people can more readily accept).   

So the problem is that clearly WG would prefer rank to remain a team game format (as opposed to a 1v1 solo or free-for-all mode), yet reducing the impact of RNG or of losing will more readily let some players rank out (thus reducing the player population and total number of games necessary to rank out) which is again something clearly contrary to the desired result.   The solution to keeping this team win based game mode with generally long grind, while simultaneously reducing the pain of the grind has been suggested multiple times (I think this is personally my 5th season of pointing this out), and I am going to put it out there yet again.  Ranked star assignments should simply be post game before win bonus is assigned to each players XP, the 14 players are aligned from highest XP to lowest. 

With stars being given as follows*

  1. Gain a star regardless of team
  2. Winning team gain a star, losing team keep a star
  3. Winning team gain a star, losing team keep a star
  4. Winning team gain a star, losing team keep a star
  5. Winning team gain a star, losing team keep a star
  6. Winning team gain a star, losing team keep a star
  7. Winning team gain a star, losing team keep a star
  8. Losing team lose a star, winning team keep a star
  9. Losing team lose a star, winning team keep a star
  10. Losing team lose a star, winning team keep a star
  11. Losing team lose a star, winning team keep a star
  12. Losing team lose a star, winning team keep a star
  13. Losing team lose a star, winning team keep a star
  14. Lose a star regardless of team**

*Situations of ties, both/all players gain/lose a star as according to their team's placement.

**Minimum score of 100 XP required to gain or keep a star, <100XP automatically loses a star as afk, even if there is a lower score)

The result is simply that unlike the current system with every game awarding 7 stars, taking away 6 stars, and allowing 1 kept star (ie a system designed to create great fluctuation), On average only about 7 stars will be given and/or taken and 7 stars will be kept.   Players will have far more static placement, and people at or about their skill level maximum will see much slower slides and climbs.   The yo-yo effect will be gone.   Thus even if losing every match in a night, and not being the best player, often a person won't lose a rank at least.  Just as if they are at their skill ceiling, even if winning every game in a night they likely won't climb a rank. 

The system still rewards spammed games and good play, but with less frustration and "helpless feeling;' factor.  Super unicums who top their team every battle can still gain stars, even when MM screws them with a terrible team.  Serial potatoes who drag their team down will have a much tougher time climbing to a level beyond their skill and more quickly be dispatched.  Heck doing this means you can remove "irrevocable" ranks entirely.  WG still gets what it wants, a game spam fest to burn off player's excess flags and put the pressure on people to spend real world money, and players get to feel like they make actual progress and if not ranking out are getting some sort of numerical assignment of their skill level.

TL;DR:
The simplest change to reduce ranked complaints is to make most of the root causes of the complaints go away: the pain of the yo-yo effect (gain a star lose a star, gain a rank lose a rank), make stars more difficult to get but also more difficult to lose.  Make it about how well a player does when they win or lose, not ONLY about whether they win or top the losing team.  Thus allowing players to play until they hit their skill ceiling without the pain and frustration of the up and down effect.   The player base has spoken and quite clearly those who draw excitement from the anticipation of the sudden ups and downs of stars are in the minority.   Most players would rather play with more reliable ability to predict the outcome of their next match.

Ok, well lets look at this. 

What makes Ranked competitive rather than just 7v7 Randoms is the Star System.  There is a real incentive to win and a real disincentive to lose.   This is different from Random, Co-Op or even Operations mode because even if you "lose" in those modes, you win.  You're standing in the game doesn't change, you don't lose anything from losing, other than the rewards you get will be less than would be the case if you won.  

In Ranked, if you lose, you actual lose something that you're trying to hang on to, that never to be sufficiently @#$!% star.  

It's what makes the mode frustrating when you lose and provides that sense of accomplishment if you win.  Without it, Ranked is just Randoms with a different name. 

If I read your proposal correctly, what you are advocating is a pure XP earned system where players gain stars by being the 7 highest XP earners.  This creates a clear disincentive to team play since, your play as a team doesn't matter, only your personal xp production.  This will reduce the chance that players will place their vessels in difficult positions, which may help their team win or even be essential to the win, but be xp generation poor and instead promote damage farming, camping and low risk strategies which decrease the chance of a negative result and which promotes the chances of being in the game long enough to farm enough damage to be one of the top 7 XP earners. 

Are you really suggesting that promoting more passive and individually focused game play is what is needed here? 

Further, if you have nothing to lose, then Ranked becomes entirely about the grind.  Is that something you consider a good thing as well? 

I know perspectives differ, but I don't see any of these suggestions as actual improvements to the mode to make it a better competitive game mode, what I see is random battle mode with even less incentives to act like a team and every reason not to.  It's not competitive because you have nothing to lose which is very much like an event in Randoms where if you gain enough xp you get this or that reward.  

Really, you don't need to have a different mode to just recreate a Random event scheme, just fold it in as a Random Battles event, you'd probably have a better chance of generating an actual team cooperative approach there than in what you are describing. 

I can see where you think Ranked is going downhill.  It's moved from being the premier competitive event in WOWS to a secondary status behind Clan Wars and other Clan related events.  It's moved to include only the highest tier ships as the price for entry.  Even Clan Wars is more open to a wider range of potential players and it's certainly under promoted today as compared to the pre-Clan War era so it's not hard to understand why its lost some of it's luster to the player base since a number of other highly regarded alternatives now exist. 

That being said, I don't see this as being anything resembling a solution.  

It will however be interesting to see how Ranked Sprint is going to work out.  There's a lot of interesting ideas there that I'm looking forward to seeing in actual use. 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×