Ranked battles insensitive

[DreamKrushers]

I would like to see what it would take as far as incentives to get people to play ranked battles.

[Fleet_Admiral_Kolchak]

Reward teamwork so people will at least try and fight together

 

 

[klymar8]

Any of them ( or all would be best lol ) but the taking away of xp from the losers ( I mean 5 times I've made it to rank 15 and had Yolo's go off and help lose it for me 6 out of 10 try's to get any progress past it ) . Sometimes it is not really fair for an opforce player to be punished for his team mates lack of teamwork . 

[Sinboto]

I'd say credits, give people some more cash for fighting in the ranked matches. 

[Crucis]

I don't know what RB's you guys have been seeing, but I'd have to say that about 90% of the time (just a wild guess on my part, BTW), the teams I've been on in RB's have been pretty good about team work.  Rogue players have been very, very rare on the teams I've been on.

 

As for Chien_Lu's suggestion about taking away XP from losing teams, honestly I can think of no suggestion that's MORE likely to drive people away from Ranked Battles than that.  When I'm trying my hardest to play smart and be a part of the team, the last thing I want to have happen is to get punished because some jerk decides to go rogue on the team, since in my experience in RB's this far, having a rogue on your team is almost a guaranteed loss.

 

 

[SourHammer]

Stop grouping players according to rank,   It takes to long to get into battle when you reach rank ten.     Im not waiting 30+ min for a battle.   

[Crucis]

Stop grouping players according to rank,   It takes to long to get into battle when you reach rank ten.     Im not waiting 30+ min for a battle.   

 

 

While I appreciate your sentiment, it sort of misses the entire point of Ranked Battles.  That is, you advance by defeating players of similar rank (and supposedly ability).  Climbing all the way to rank 1 on the backs of low ranked players isn't really an accomplishment worth bragging about.

 

 

[klymar8]

I don't know what RB's you guys have been seeing, but I'd have to say that about 90% of the time (just a wild guess on my part, BTW), the teams I've been on in RB's have been pretty good about team work.  Rogue players have been very, very rare on the teams I've been on.

 

As for Chien_Lu's suggestion about taking away XP from losing teams, honestly I can think of no suggestion that's MORE likely to drive people away from Ranked Battles than that.  When I'm trying my hardest to play smart and be a part of the team, the last thing I want to have happen is to get punished because some jerk decides to go rogue on the team, since in my experience in RB's this far, having a rogue on your team is almost a guaranteed loss.

 

 

 

I think you misunderstood . I said any of them would be an incentive to me  BUT the taking away of xp from the losing team .

[InvalidKey]

There are dozens of T2, T3 ships they could introduce for little or no cost for this kind of thing.  People will play for a ship, even if it's bad.

[Incisor007]

Other - Top 50% of players advance - regardless of side.  Winning bonus still counts.

[Crucis]

I don't know what RB's you guys have been seeing, but I'd have to say that about 90% of the time (just a wild guess on my part, BTW), the teams I've been on in RB's have been pretty good about team work.  Rogue players have been very, very rare on the teams I've been on.

 

As for Chien_Lu's suggestion about taking away XP from losing teams, honestly I can think of no suggestion that's MORE likely to drive people away from Ranked Battles than that.  When I'm trying my hardest to play smart and be a part of the team, the last thing I want to have happen is to get punished because some jerk decides to go rogue on the team, since in my experience in RB's this far, having a rogue on your team is almost a guaranteed loss.

 

 

 

I think you misunderstood . I said any of them would be an incentive to me  BUT the taking away of xp from the losing team .

 

 

I guess that I did.  But honestly, if I misunderstood, it was because it was somewhat written.  Personally, I would have said, any of them EXCEPT the taking away of XP.....  That is a much more clear statement to me.  The use of "but" as another form of "except" can often be confusing.  But all in all, that's neither here nor there.

 

 

[Crucis]

Other - Top 50% of players advance - regardless of side.  Winning bonus still counts.

 

Or maybe a variant of this. 

 

Everyone on the winning team advances PLUS the top XP player on the losing team. 

 

Or

 

Everyone on the winning team advances, except the winning player with the lowest XP earned.  And the top XP player on the losing team advances.

 

 

[klymar8]

 

Or maybe a variant of this.

 

Everyone on the winning team advances PLUS the top XP player on the losing team.

 

Or

 

Everyone on the winning team advances, except the winning player with the lowest XP earned.  And the top XP player on the losing team advances.

 

 

 

I like this one to . Heck 3 times I have been the only one on my team to get a kill and all 3 times I got 2 kills not just 1 .

[DreamKrushers]

Reward teamwork so people will at least try and fight together

 

 

 

i understand, but how exactly would you reward teamwork. Easy to say but be more specific.

[GearWheel]

For me it is not the YOLO player that happens once in a while.  But the ships, mainly BB's that sit a the back of map out of range and cannot and will not help as our team moves up the map.  While the other team sits on the "Keys" .  At least the YOLO is trying to help. We all get caught out sometime.

But the worst is the ships that sit at the back of map all game seem to get highest scores with the rest of team been sunk and they don't seem to care about winning.

Reward people for staying close together and moving up the map.  How to do that?

A penalty for the ships that will sit at the back of map when most of the team has moved up. Never mind how many weaken ships they sink at end of the battle. 

Maybe that would get them to move up and get into the battle sooner.

You cant put penalties on the losing team. For if so, I would never play Ranked Battles again.

Rewarding the top players on losing team sounds good to me. But not if they sat at the back all game!

[Crucis]

For me it is not the YOLO player that happens once in a while.  But the ships, mainly BB's that sit a the back of map out of range and cannot and will not help as our team moves up the map.  While the other team sits on the "Keys" .  At least the YOLO is trying to help. We all get caught out sometime.

But the worst is the ships that sit at the back of map all game seem to get highest scores with the rest of team been sunk and they don't seem to care about winning.

Reward people for staying close together and moving up the map.  How to do that?

A penalty for the ships that will sit at the back of map when most of the team has moved up. Never mind how many weaken ships they sink at end of the battle. 

Maybe that would get them to move up and get into the battle sooner.

You cant put penalties on the losing team. For if so, I would never play Ranked Battles again.

Rewarding the top players on losing team sounds good to me. But not if they sat at the back all game!

 

 

I have to strongly disagree.  The YOLO player is doing more to hurt the team than the sniping BBs are by hanging back.  Losing your ship stupidly is far worse in Ranked battles, since with only 7 ships per team, every ship counts a lot more than in 12v12 random battles.

 

Also, if I'm in a BB and am sniping and am doing major damage (let's say for argument's sake, in the vicinity of 100k damage), if the rest of the team is so bad that they can't clean up the heavily wounded enemies that I'm creating, you don't deserve to win and don't blame me for not closing the range.  Mind you, I'm not going to totally defend having BB's hinging back at max range and sniping the entire battle.  OTOH, I'm not going to be in a rush to get any closer than maybe 10-12 km either, since IJN CA's and DD's have 10km range torps, and 10-12 km is a good range for effective shooting in a BB.  (Of course, this is also rather map dependent.)

 

But at the end of the day, if your BBs are smashing the heck out of the enemy team but the rest of the team isn't finish off the wrecks that their BBs create, the rest of the team is not pulling its weight and probably deserves to lose.