Jump to content
You need to play a total of 20 battles to post in this section.
Pikachu_lvl23

Ranked - star saving system rework proposal

Change star Saving system?  

30 members have voted

  1. 1. Star system proposals best options

    • the current system where winning team earns star while for the losing team the top saves star and the rest lose star
      6
    • the top 7 xp earners gain star, 8th best xp earner saves star, bottom 6 loss star regardless if team wins or losses
      15
    • some other idea
      9

41 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

14
[APEZ]
Members
41 posts
1,924 battles

Ok so the new ranked sprint system has some good and bad things about it that ppl have expressed. Some ppl are unhappy with the rewards and others are unhappy about the quality of play in gold league. this idea i think helps with the quality of play.

Right now if your team wins, you earn a star, If your team losses, no matter how well you play, you can only save a star if you are top otherwise you lose a star. 

The problem with this system, bad games by players on the winning team earn a star while the good games by players can get punished and at best save star just because they lost.

I think this is the reason why the quality of play in gold was what it was. compared to the previous system it is much easier to reach gold than rank 5 due to all the stopping points from bronze and silver. This is why there were alot of red players in gold league and such a big skill gap which is frustrating for competitive play for everyone. 

Solution A subtle performance based approach - "why not change the the top 7 base xp earners to gain a star regardless if their team wins or losses"

this way teams are still incentivised to win because you get more base xp for winning but it also address the problem of 1-2 players on the losing team who have over 1500 base xp and played very well while the bottom 1-2 on the winning team could have less than 600 xp yet they earned a star even though they basically did nothing that match. Bonkers.... With this all 7 players on the winning team could still earn star especially since the base xp boost for winning, this just addresses the games of extreme cases which is quite frequent. 

"Finally the player with the 8th highest base xp saves star and bottom 6 xp earners lose star regardless of team"

Hypothetical result
1. 
the quality of play in gold will be improved (not perfect, but improved)
2. toxicity and player frustration could be lowered due to smaller player skill gap
3. the grind to rank out in a sprint will be less daunting and the rewards will be more worthwhile time wise
4. really good games on losing teams have greater value over really bad games on winning teams

What do yall think? im sure there could be bigger changes to the star saving system but i think this is one of the roots of the problem with ranked. I personally really like the idea of the sprints and it seems more relaxing to play it. but i think this would make it a lot better.

-(added 2/7/21) As an example or a reference point, here is the system for WoT. some ppl complain about his method too, but i like how the system is more dynamic by distinguishing the level of play on winning and losing teams. 

image.png.64d881ed306f5d27703fc11c76c8bd52.png

Pika

Edited by Pikachu_lvl23
  • Cool 3
  • Haha 1
  • Meh 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
1,531 posts

Well with the current system the winning team may have less effective players but their sacrifice may have turned the tide of battle in favor of the team.

Base exp has no bearing on the game itself until after the battle.

The win decides where the spoils go.

  • Meh 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8,677
[GWG]
[GWG]
Alpha Tester
27,849 posts
14,882 battles

I like the idea of the top 7 base experience earners advance/earn a star and do away with saving a star completely.

  • Thanks 1
  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14
[APEZ]
Members
41 posts
1,924 battles
11 minutes ago, BrushWolf said:

I like the idea of the top 7 base experience earners advance/earn a star and do away with saving a star completely.

why get rid of the save star? just curious on your thoughts

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8,677
[GWG]
[GWG]
Alpha Tester
27,849 posts
14,882 battles
1 minute ago, Pikachu_lvl23 said:

why get rid of the save star? just curious on your thoughts

 

I suppose it could stay but I don't see any need for it with that system.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
705
[APEZ]
Members
1,496 posts
9,776 battles

Option #2 is definitely in the right direction.  As many have often said, team work needs to be rewarded with XP.  I think by fine tuning XP, it would be possible to weed out people that simply are not contributing. 


Possible team work based XP
Spotting damage, potential damage, damage after you radar a ship, smoking a teammate who then gets damage while in your smoke.

Another idea would be to reward a star based off of over-performing over a span of battles.  A metric would need to be found, but that would help people advance that have simply had unlucky teams.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,314
[SALVO]
Members
6,932 posts
5,487 battles

This idea has been floated before. I have already posted my opinion on why it would be terrible and how it would totally work against team play and promote the most selfish and grievous style of play.

Short version, winning becomes irrelevant and you are directly competing against your team mates.

  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14
[APEZ]
Members
41 posts
1,924 battles
8 minutes ago, ArIskandir said:

This idea has been floated before. I have already posted my opinion on why it would be terrible and how it would totally work against team play and promote the most selfish and grievous style of play.

Short version, winning becomes irrelevant and you are directly competing against your team mates.

yeah that a good point. we were just talking about that in our discord. the only push back i have to that idea is that idea to me seems to more hinge on the thought that all ppl who save star play selfishly and dont help the team win, where i find ppl who try to win also save star quite a bit and in my opinion i think they save star more than ppl who dont supposedly help win and just sit back. 

the other issue i see with that idea is that this also assumes that team play is a major factor in ranked. Imo team play in ranked is about as dependable as team play in randoms (which imo is non existent). i think team play really matters in Clan battles but that is because you are in coms with one another so you have the ability to effectively communicate and you have control over ships you bring and stuff and strats.

Also, ppls idea of team play is very different depending on the skill of the player. A red players idea of team play is gonna be very different than a super unicums idea of team play. Therefore imo since team play is so unreliable and inconsistent, why is this the most important factor in ranked to progress. That's why i think something more performance based is better.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,314
[SALVO]
Members
6,932 posts
5,487 battles
14 minutes ago, Pikachu_lvl23 said:

yeah that a good point. we were just talking about that in our discord. the only push back i have to that idea is that idea to me seems to more hinge on the thought that all ppl who save star play selfishly and dont help the team win, where i find ppl who try to win also save star quite a bit and in my opinion i think they save star more than ppl who dont supposedly help win and just sit back. 

the other issue i see with that idea is that this also assumes that team play is a major factor in ranked. Imo team play in ranked is about as dependable as team play in randoms (which imo is non existent). i think team play really matters in Clan battles but that is because you are in coms with one another so you have the ability to effectively communicate and you have control over ships you bring and stuff and strats.

Also, ppls idea of team play is very different depending on the skill of the player. A red players idea of team play is gonna be very different than a super unicums idea of team play. Therefore imo since team play is so unreliable and inconsistent, why is this the most important factor in ranked to progress. That's why i think something more performance based is better.

The core problem I see with this approach (rewarding top performers on both teams, instead of winning)is it breaks completely any notion of team play, your team mates become your direct competitors. At least by rewarding winning, even if team play is unreliable, it remains in your best interest that your team mates remain alive and contributing towards the common goal (victory). Otoh under this proposed scheme, it would be in your best interest that your team mates (all of them if possible) die as quickly and as useless as possible, worse... it would be promoting you helping them die.

Edited by ArIskandir
  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14
[APEZ]
Members
41 posts
1,924 battles
2 minutes ago, ArIskandir said:

The core problem I see with this approach (rewarding top performers on both teams, instead of winning)is it breaks completely any notion of team play, your team mates become your direct competitors. At least by rewarding winning, even if team play is unreliable, it remains in your best interest that your team mates remain alive and contributing towards the common goal (victory). Otoh under this proposed scheme, it would be in your best interest that your team mates (all of them if possible) die as quickly and as useless as possible, worse... it would be promoting you helping them die.

there still is an incentive to win though. you get more base xp (i think 2x?) for winning. so you still will want to win since it would be very hard for a member on the losing team to actually beat a guy on the winning team.  i think what would happen is like 75% of the time, most if not all of the players who win will earn star. i think this will really only matter in the more extreme cases where one player on the losing team plays really well, where a person on the wining team did absolutely nothing at all. 

so i dont think this breaks notion of team play at all. in fact all i think what it would do is just better filter out the lower tier players in the higher leagues. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,314
[SALVO]
Members
6,932 posts
5,487 battles
1 minute ago, Pikachu_lvl23 said:

there still is an incentive to win though. you get more base xp (i think 2x?) for winning. so you still will want to win since it would be very hard for a member on the losing team to actually beat a guy on the winning team.  i think what would happen is like 75% of the time, most if not all of the players who win will earn star. i think this will really only matter in the more extreme cases where one player on the losing team plays really well, where a person on the wining team did absolutely nothing at all. 

so i dont think this breaks notion of team play at all. in fact all i think what it would do is just better filter out the lower tier players in the higher leagues. 

Let me put it this way, it is really difficult for me not to get more XP than the bottom player of the winning team, there's always some guys yoloing, or being generally useless. What this promotes is that I will definitively won't spot, help or collaborate in anyway with a team mate, because I will be helping them to win XP and that's really bad for my interest. The guys on the other side will be doing the same, and you can bet the best players on both sides would be focusing on farming damage and not helping their team mates. You may filter bad players but the game play would be horrible, I wouldn't touch such game mode, never ever... it would be the most toxic dump you could imagine.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14
[APEZ]
Members
41 posts
1,924 battles
1 minute ago, ArIskandir said:

Let me put it this way, it is really difficult for me not to get more XP than the bottom player of the winning team, there's always some guys yoloing, or being generally useless. What this promotes is that I will definitively won't spot, help or collaborate in anyway with a team mate, because I will be helping them to win XP and that's really bad for my interest. The guys on the other side will be doing the same, and you can bet the best players on both sides would be focusing on farming damage and not helping their team mates. You may filter bad players but the game play would be horrible, I wouldn't touch such game mode, never ever... it would be the most toxic dump you could imagine.

this doesn't really make sense though because you are not engaging with the fact that when you win, you get 2x more xp. everyone will be wanting to win. ppl will be scared that if they dont win, they will have a higher chance of losing star. so i dont think you can conclude there is no need to win anymore resulting in your conclusion above

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10,426
[SALVO]
Members
26,109 posts
29,083 battles
2 hours ago, Pikachu_lvl23 said:

Ok so the new ranked sprint system has some good and bad things about it that ppl have expressed. Some ppl are unhappy with the rewards and others are unhappy about the quality of play in gold league. this idea i think helps with the quality of play.

Right now if your team wins, you earn a star, If your team losses, no matter how well you play, you can only save a star if you are top otherwise you lose a star. 

The problem with this system, bad games by players on the winning team earn a star while the good games by players can get punished and at best save star just because they lost.

I think this is the reason why the quality of play in gold was what it was. compared to the previous system it is much easier to reach gold than rank 5 due to all the stopping points from bronze and silver. This is why there were alot of red players in gold league and such a big skill gap which is frustrating for competitive play for everyone. 

Solution A subtle performance based approach - "why not change the the top 7 base xp earners to gain a star regardless if their team wins or losses"

this way teams are still incentivised to win because you get more base xp for winning but it also address the problem of 1-2 players on the losing team who have over 1500 base xp and played very well while the bottom 1-2 on the winning team could have less than 600 xp yet they earned a star even though they basically did nothing that match. Bonkers.... With this all 7 players on the winning team could still earn star especially since the base xp boost for winning, this just addresses the games of extreme cases which is quite frequent. 

"Finally the player with the 8th highest base xp saves star and bottom 6 xp earners lose star regardless of team"

Hypothetical result
1. 
the quality of play in gold will be improved (not perfect, but improved)
2. toxicity and player frustration will be lowered due to smaller player skill gap
3. the grind to rank out in a sprint will be less daunting and the rewards will be more worthwhile time wise
4. really good games on losing teams have greater value over really bad games on winning teams

What do yall think? im sure there could be bigger changes to the star saving system but i think this is one of the roots of the problem with ranked. I personally really like the idea of the sprints and it seems more relaxing to play it. but i think this would make it a lot better. 

 

Pika

I suggested this two years ago or so and nothing's ever come of it.

  • Funny 1
  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,358
[PVE]
Members
7,852 posts
23,792 battles

I smoke for the team& stay out & spot...

The team takes in massive damage & all I get for XP is the spotting damage...

My XP sux & I lose a star...

Why would I even consider smoking for my team when I can use that smoke more for my personal benefit (smoking for myself & farming personal damage...once the reds shoot my team spots for me instead) & guaranteeing my star is "earned".

The 1st 2 lines is my standard ranked DD play (w/the addition of area denial torps & trying specifically to spot the red DDs from the get go...& throughout until they're dead)...

But it won't be anymore if the 3rd line ends up being the results...the 4th would become the new SOP.

33 minutes ago, Pikachu_lvl23 said:

you get more base xp (i think 2x?) for winning.

Only +50% BXP for a win...same as every other mode besides CBs w/it's set BXP values.

 

But as for a related aside...(this in reference to the current system as it would be a moot point in OP's suggestion) if you're the top XP earned on the losing team & your BXP is more than the top BXP earner on the winning team (after winning bonus is applied) you should not only save a star but earn a star.

Edited by IfYouSeeKhaos
  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,314
[SALVO]
Members
6,932 posts
5,487 battles
3 minutes ago, Pikachu_lvl23 said:

this doesn't really make sense though because you are not engaging with the fact that when you win, you get 2x more xp. everyone will be wanting to win. ppl will be scared that if they dont win, they will have a higher chance of losing star. so i dont think you can conclude there is no need to win anymore resulting in your conclusion above

First, you don't get x2 XP, I think it is about %50 bonus for winning. Even then, what's the whole point of your idea of reworking the star saving mechanic? If winning is not a strong enough motivator when winning is actually required for you to win a star, why do you think winning will be a motivator when winning is actually not required for you to win a star?

If your point is to prevent bad players progressing into higher leagues, then you need to improve the gate system between leagues. 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14
[APEZ]
Members
41 posts
1,924 battles
1 minute ago, Crucis said:

I suggested this two years ago or so and nothing's ever come of it.

yikes

 

1 minute ago, IfYouSeeKhaos said:

I smoke for the team& stay out & spot...

The team takes in massive damage & all I get for XP is the spotting damage...

My XP sux & I lose a star...

Why would I even consider smoking for my team when I can use that smoke more for my personal benefit (smoking for myself & farming personal damage...once the reds shoot my team spots for me instead) & guaranteeing my star is "earned".

The 1st 2 lines is my standard ranked DD play (w/the addition of area denial torps & trying specifically to spot the red DDs from the get go...& throughout until they're dead)...

But it won't be anymore if the 3rd line ends up being the results...the 4th would become the new SOP.

Only +50% BXP for a win...same as every other mode besides CBs w/it's set BXP values.

 

But as for a related aside...if you're the top XP earned on the losing team & your BXP is more than the top BXP earner on the winning team (after winning bonus is applied) you should not only save a star but earn a star.

yeah i meant for the top 7 to earn star. so thats a typo and thanks for telling me about the +50% i couldnt remember if it was +50% or +100%

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14
[APEZ]
Members
41 posts
1,924 battles
1 minute ago, ArIskandir said:

First, you don't get x2 XP, I think it is about %50 bonus for winning. Even then, what's the whole point of your idea of reworking the star saving mechanic? If winning is not a strong enough motivator when winning is actually required for you to win a star, why do you think winning will be a motivator when winning is actually not required for you to win a star?

If your point is to prevent bad players progressing into higher leagues, then you need to improve the gate system between leagues. 

yeah thats correct on the 2x i did say above i couldnt remember but regardless the point stands, there is an incentive.

and its not just the star saving mechanic its the whole system. I think with the current system ppl get pissed when their team is gonna lose and they just put their frustration on (the person who sat in the back and saved star) and (he person who yeeted in and died). so what you are poking at is a problem now and the proposed wouldnt add anything different. 

I think what this address is the frustration of someone playing really well and they are on a bad team and they just missed saving star or they saved star while someone on the winning team did nothing and had like almost 0 bxp. to me this is a much bigger problem than the subjectivity of players playing to save star versus trying to win. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,358
[PVE]
Members
7,852 posts
23,792 battles
2 minutes ago, Pikachu_lvl23 said:

yikes

 

yeah i meant for the top 7 to earn star. so thats a typo and thanks for telling me about the +50% i couldnt remember if it was +50% or +100%

 

My idea was in reference to the current system...top BXP in a loss earns (not just saves but earns) a star if BXP is higher than the top BXP player of the winning team...it would be irrelevant in your proposal as he'd be in the top 7 or 8 anyway (I'll edit it for clarity though).

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14
[APEZ]
Members
41 posts
1,924 battles
Just now, IfYouSeeKhaos said:

My idea was in reference to the current system...top BXP in a loss earns (not just saves but earns) a star if BXP is higher than the top BXP player of the winning team...it would be irrelevant in your proposal as he'd be in the top 7 or 8 anyway (I'll edit it for clarity though).

oh i meant i must have had a typo not you! lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
869 posts
1 hour ago, IfYouSeeKhaos said:

if you're the top XP earned on the losing team & your BXP is more than the top BXP earner on the winning team (after winning bonus is applied) you should not only save a star but earn a star.

:fish_book: :Smile_medal:   yes  this ^^^^^^^

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8,677
[GWG]
[GWG]
Alpha Tester
27,849 posts
14,882 battles
On 2/4/2021 at 6:48 PM, ArIskandir said:

This idea has been floated before. I have already posted my opinion on why it would be terrible and how it would totally work against team play and promote the most selfish and grievous style of play.

Short version, winning becomes irrelevant and you are directly competing against your team mates.

Playing to win would still be a big advantage and those that are not contributing would not be advancing on the coat tails of the ones that are not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
566
[-TKS-]
[-TKS-]
Members
1,320 posts
13,158 battles
On 2/4/2021 at 6:16 PM, Pikachu_lvl23 said:

"why not change the the top 7 base xp earners to gain a star regardless if their team wins or losses"

So... you have a problem when 1 person on each team is doing it.. now you want  to incentivize 7 players to save their star??

your math is funny. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
566
[-TKS-]
[-TKS-]
Members
1,320 posts
13,158 battles
23 hours ago, Pikachu_lvl23 said:

while someone on the winning team did nothing and had like almost 0 bxp

sometimes its about doing the little things that get the win. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
566
[-TKS-]
[-TKS-]
Members
1,320 posts
13,158 battles
On 2/4/2021 at 6:16 PM, Pikachu_lvl23 said:

1. the quality of play in gold will be improved (not perfect, but improved)
2. toxicity and player frustration will be lowered due to smaller player skill gap
3. the grind to rank out in a sprint will be less daunting and the rewards will be more worthwhile time wise
4. really good games on losing teams have greater value over really bad games on winning teams

1) not really improved. in fact, its likely the perception is it gets worse. 

2) toxicity would increase as now everyone is trying to pump up their base xp instead of winning. no one is going for the actual win because there is a chance that even if you win, you didnt do enough... so.. you might forgo the winning cap, to farm more... to ensure you can win the star. 

3) the impact on the grind would only shift around play styles, but in no way would it guarantee its easier.  in every battle someone loses a star. 

4) really good games on the losing team currently saves you a star. so, no change. 

Edited by skillztowin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,314
[SALVO]
Members
6,932 posts
5,487 battles
3 hours ago, BrushWolf said:

Playing to win would still be a big advantage and those that are not contributing would not be advancing on the coat tails of the ones that are not.

Say I'm a DD...

Why would I ever spot for you or smoke you? I would gain nothing from it but you would... Bad idea, forget it... It won't happen ever again 

Why would I risk my ship contesting a cap, or waste time stalling or reseting a cap when I could just forget about it and go farm BBs?

Why would I screen the BBs? Wouldn't be better if they eat some torps and die fast, without farming enough damage to risk my place in the table?

Hey I see your ship is badly damaged but you managed to disengage and go dark, you will heal and keep up fighting but you know...you are playing too good, we are possibly losing and you could outscore me... Maybe I can park beside you, fire some shots and draw return fire... Oops, you got hit by accident and died...

I could go on, and on, and on... Pure toxicity

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×