Remove Tier 7's from Ranked battle

[AltSeagullBBM]

The quality of players and skill is to low.....

 

with all of the tier 7's and non-revokable ranks, ranked battle is little more than random battles with less people.

[beliy_demon]

The quality of players and skill is to low.....

 

with all of the tier 7's and non-revokable ranks, ranked battle is little more than random battles with less people.

 

+1.   

[crzyhawk]

baddies have a right to play ranked too.

 

more pew pew, more carry, less qq

[Xero_Snake]

Ranked battle is more of exercising players' teamwork, communications and leadership skills, rather than just exercising yourself alone like in Random battles. Entering into Ranked battles feels like in a different environment in a sense that with less people per team, players may have more control on themselves and their responsibilities as a team. One would either win or lose as a team.

 

In terms of ranked league levels:

 

Bronze: Tier V - VI

Silver: Tier VII - VIII

Gold: Tier VII - VIII

Proposed Platinum: Tier IX - X

Proposed Diamond: Tier IX - X

[1nc0mp3t3nt_1]

Ranked battle is more of exercising players' teamwork, communications and leadership skills, rather than just exercising yourself alone like in Random battles. Entering into Ranked battles feels like in a different environment in a sense that with less people per team, players may have more control on themselves and their responsibilities as a team. One would either win or lose as a team.

 

In terms of ranked league levels:

 

Bronze: Tier V - VI

Silver: Tier VII - VIII

Gold: Tier VII - VIII

Proposed Platinum: Tier IX - X

Proposed Diamond: Tier IX - X

 

I would actually vote Silver league being tiers VI-VII

and Diamond VIII-IX

[Batwingsix]

Either way you will have the Atago and Tirpitz warriors...

[AsseylumAllusia]

Either way you will have the Atago and Tirpitz warriors...

 

Atago is a solid ship and so is the tirpits.

[Batwingsix]

 

Atago is a solid ship and so is the tirpits.

 

In the hands of good players... in the hands of a good player a Tier 7 can be too. Why I nuked an Atago last match in ranked with my Blys guns only... I should have been eaten for lunch since I was only 4km as I turned the corner, however the player panicked and launched torps too early and found out that even a DD can citadel him with AP 

[Sir_Godz]

Ranked battle is more of exercising players' teamwork, communications and leadership skills, rather than just exercising yourself alone like in Random battles. Entering into Ranked battles feels like in a different environment in a sense that with less people per team, players may have more control on themselves and their responsibilities as a team. One would either win or lose as a team.

 

In terms of ranked league levels:

 

Bronze: Tier V - VI

Silver: Tier VII - VIII

Gold: Tier VII - VIII

Proposed Platinum: Tier IX - X

Proposed Diamond: Tier IX - X

 

I feel the issue in ranked and why the win advancement based system doesn't work is because it is soooo teamwork based that one or two players who are poor at the game have such an overwhelming influence on the game's outcome that the abilities to overcome that are too few among the player base.

WG suggesting, if they are at all, that this system encourages teamwork fails on the assumption that people understand what is required to bring about a win.

Making ranked XP based, even as an entering rank level is the only way to separate those that can and will work for the team win.

People should not be unable to try to win of course but as with an worthwhile and well regarded competition there needs to be a filtering process for the different levels of skill.

Starting former rank 1 players at rank 14 is a good example of how misplaced the idea's behind the system are. Yes those players will advance quickly away from the rest but They should never have to play with those people to begin with. Again the chance of winning will purely come down to if there are enough better players on your team vs the other. This goes to reinforce how it's not how skilled you are but how many unskilled players you will have to compensate for. A player who always comes in near last place on a team should just never be on a team with players who routinely finish at the top.

There really needs to be two ranked contests. being in one or the other based on XP level. If a player can't average a certain placing on their team they can't advance to the other league. This would also ensure that the people who know how to play would get group with others that also demonstrated their competency.

[AsseylumAllusia]

 

In the hands of good players... in the hands of a good player a Tier 7 can be too. Why I nuked an Atago last match in ranked with my Blys guns only... I should have been eaten for lunch since I was only 4km as I turned the corner, however the player panicked and launched torps too early and found out that even a DD can citadel him with AP 

 

blysk can cit with ap on the atago? seriously?

 

[Batwingsix]

 

I feel the issue in ranked and why the win advancement based system doesn't work is because it is soooo teamwork based that one or two players who are poor at the game have such an overwhelming influence on the game's outcome that the abilities to overcome that are too few among the player base.

WG suggesting, if they are at all, that this system encourages teamwork fails on the assumption that people understand what is required to bring about a win.

Making ranked XP based, even as an entering rank level is the only way to separate those that can and will work for the team win.

People should not be unable to try to win of course but as with an worthwhile and well regarded competition there needs to be a filtering process for the different levels of skill.

Starting former rank 1 players at rank 14 is a good example of how misplaced the idea's behind the system are. Yes those players will advance quickly away from the rest but They should never have to play with those people to begin with. Again the chance of winning will purely come down to if there are enough better players on your team vs the other. This goes to reinforce how it's not how skilled you are but how many unskilled players you will have to compensate for. A player who always comes in near last place on a team should just never be on a team with players who routinely finish at the top.

There really needs to be two ranked contests. being in one or the other based on XP level. If a player can't average a certain placing on their team they can't advance to the other league. This would also ensure that the people who know how to play would get group with others that also demonstrated their competency.

 

Problem is XP is damage and cap based. A BB can sit in one spot dishing out damage and die but still make some of the top spots on a team basic only on the damage they did. Yes damage is contribution but it doesn't make a player good. There are some players (mostly 5-6 tier bracket) who are still using HE in BB's... it shouldn't prevent them from playing, maybe players giving helpful advice in a polite manner can make them a better team member in another match. Things I often try to do is ask if there are any real battle plans, and usually (with exception of once or twice) we can all agree on a battle plan and stick to it for the most part. Making ranked into a Tier 10 (referencing earlier posts) will make the base of players so small it wouldn't be fun plus it would exclude players. Yes we all hate players who couldn't find their posterior with a map and a compass, but they are there in every game and is the nature of the beast. 

[Batwingsix]

 

blysk can cit with ap on the atago? seriously?

 

 

Oh yes, 4 citadels in on salvo, was GLORIOUS

 

[MATip09]

 

Problem is XP is damage and cap based. A BB can sit in one spot dishing out damage and die but still make some of the top spots on a team basic only on the damage they did. Yes damage is contribution but it doesn't make a player good. There are some players (mostly 5-6 tier bracket) who are still using HE in BB's... it shouldn't prevent them from playing, maybe players giving helpful advice in a polite manner can make them a better team member in another match. Things I often try to do is ask if there are any real battle plans, and usually (with exception of once or twice) we can all agree on a battle plan and stick to it for the most part. Making ranked into a Tier 10 (referencing earlier posts) will make the base of players so small it wouldn't be fun plus it would exclude players. Yes we all hate players who couldn't find their posterior with a map and a compass, but they are there in every game and is the nature of the beast.

 

Agreed!

[Sabene]

Sick of the whining.  Play the format or don't play it.

 

Making tiers IX and X part of ranked battles would seem a mistake, given the high repair costs.

Folks with a tier VII usually have a tier VIII.  There is a reason they brought the VII.  Why limit them?  And, if we start pursuing a discrimination process then shouldn't we disallow all premium ships entirely?  Heck, nobody trusts a 'wallet warrior', right?

I took an Atlanta into ranked and the OP told me to not queue up again.  Curious, that was, as I fly the Jolly Roger and the Atlanta helped me get there.

This game is a work in progress.  The developers are making it happen.  And, contrary to popular belief, they WANT us to enjoy and support the game.  To that end they make the game format as workable as they can.

Relax.

Play on.

Folks that can't cut the mustard won't make it to Rank One.

Folks that blame others for their failures rarely succeed.

 

~ Sabene

 

 

[Batwingsix]

Sick of the whining.  Play the format or don't play it.

 

Making tiers IX and X part of ranked battles would seem a mistake, given the high repair costs.

Folks with a tier VII usually have a tier VIII.  There is a reason they brought the VII.  Why limit them?  And, if we start pursuing a discrimination process then shouldn't we disallow all premium ships entirely?  Heck, nobody trusts a 'wallet warrior', right?

I took an Atlanta into ranked and the OP told me to not queue up again.  Curious, that was, as I fly the Jolly Roger and the Atlanta helped me get there.

This game is a work in progress.  The developers are making it happen.  And, contrary to popular belief, they WANT us to enjoy and support the game.  To that end they make the game format as workable as they can.

Relax.

Play on.

Folks that can't cut the mustard won't make it to Rank One.

Folks that blame others for their failures rarely succeed.

 

 

~ Sabene

 

 

 

 

 

+1 my fellow Atlanta wielding wallet warrior friend... although mine has been moored in mothball for a while lol

[Zyu]

It's honestly debatable whether CO is worth more than a NC in ranked.

I'm sick and tired of shooting at a whack-a-mole Atago/CA that peeks an island@ -10km, stops dead, fires & engages reverse and somehow takes bare minimum damage - if any at all - from my quirky [edited]North Carolina.

Colorado has much better brawl potential and certainly takes less damage while properly angled.

 

V & VI

VII & VIII

Love it

or

Leave it.

[TurboT]

It's honestly debatable whether CO is worth more than a NC in ranked.

I'm sick and tired of shooting at a whack-a-mole Atago/CA that peeks an island@ -10km, stops dead, fires & engages reverse and somehow takes bare minimum damage - if any at all - from my quirky [edited]North Carolina.

Colorado has much better brawl potential and certainly takes less damage while properly angled.

 

V & VI

VII & VIII

Love it

or

Leave it.

 

Gonna be honest, I've found over the last patch the close range BB shots are doing weird things again.  Falling short, not doing damage.  I had the same thing happen to me tonight in the Tirpitz, an Atago backed out from behind an island, I was 4.5 km from him and fired a full salvo at his waterline, he wasn't even moving that fast.  I got a 4k damage roll.  I was CHOKED.  If a dude is going to back his ship out slowly from 4km of a Battleship in this game, it should be insta wreckage.  This was not me 'not knowing how to shoot' ...  this was the game saying "No kill for you this salvo"

 

..insult to injury dude gets his torps out on me and pulls forward before I can reload, so I eat his torps and can't get any more shots into him because he's back hiding.

 

Was a sad, sad event in my evening.  Shouldn't happen.  I get RNG at long range, but not there.

 

[Zyu]

 

Gonna be honest, I've found over the last patch the close range BB shots are doing weird things again.  Falling short, not doing damage.  I had the same thing happen to me tonight in the Tirpitz, an Atago backed out from behind an island, I was 4.5 km from him and fired a full salvo at his waterline, he wasn't even moving that fast.  I got a 4k damage roll.  I was CHOKED.  If a dude is going to back his ship out slowly from 4km of a Battleship in this game, it should be insta wreckage.  This was not me 'not knowing how to shoot' ...  this was the game saying "No kill for you this salvo"

 

..insult to injury dude gets his torps out on me and pulls forward before I can reload, so I eat his torps and can't get any more shots into him because he's back hiding.

 

Was a sad, sad event in my evening.  Shouldn't happen.  I get RNG at long range, but not there.

 

 

Oh I hear yea!

If I so much as THINK of showing broadside in my CA it IS INSTA WRECKAGE.

Yet someone begs, pleads and insists I Dev Strike them? "It's tickle time on the high seas you salacious sailors!!!" ... ping "830", zing "1040", thwak "0". Major [edited]that party popper happens when guaranteed catastrophic, if not severe, damage ought to be a certainty from very close range.

 

It's so flipp'n shippy when ship happens like this all the time. I call bullship by gawd!

 

[Camo68]

I agree with Sabene,

If you play you accept that there will be tiers 7 & 8 and anyone who wants to play can. It may be frustrating but If you can't handle that don't play.

 

As for RNG rolling a 4000 that is just plain frustrating.

[HazardDrake]

Sorry, no. There are plenty of Tier 7 ships that are competitive in Ranked. That and bringing a competitive Tier 7 ships brings the chance of getting someone on the other team who has a Tier 7 that isn't.

 

Also fun is the accusation of hacking when I drive my Sims with My 15 point Gearing captain; "[edited]!!! Sims can't be stealthed from 7k away!!!"

[Arbinshire]

Sick of the whining.  Play the format or don't play it.

 

Making tiers IX and X part of ranked battles would seem a mistake, given the high repair costs.

Folks with a tier VII usually have a tier VIII.  There is a reason they brought the VII.  Why limit them?  And, if we start pursuing a discrimination process then shouldn't we disallow all premium ships entirely?  Heck, nobody trusts a 'wallet warrior', right?

I took an Atlanta into ranked and the OP told me to not queue up again.  Curious, that was, as I fly the Jolly Roger and the Atlanta helped me get there.

This game is a work in progress.  The developers are making it happen.  And, contrary to popular belief, they WANT us to enjoy and support the game.  To that end they make the game format as workable as they can.

Relax.

Play on.

Folks that can't cut the mustard won't make it to Rank One.

Folks that blame others for their failures rarely succeed.

 

 

~ Sabene

 

 

 

 

 

You average 16k damage with your Atlanta in ranked. I am sorry, but when every advantage counts, I am not going to put bets on the team with an Atlanta on it.

 

But as a whole, tier 7 ships are incredibly weak. Only the blys and Kiev are worth a tier 7 spot. 

[HazardDrake]

 

You average 16k damage with your Atlanta in ranked. I am sorry, but when every advantage counts, I am not going to put bets on the team with an Atlanta on it.

 

But as a whole, tier 7 ships are incredibly weak. Only the blys and Kiev are worth a tier 7 spot. 

 

16k!? Ouch, just Ouch.

 

I average that in My Sims in ranked, which is another Tier 7 that can be competitive if played right, and that's only because I try to play the sneaky bugger who ninja caps.

[IronWolfV]

 

blysk can cit with ap on the atago? seriously?

 

 

Only about what 70 mm of armor along the belt for most IJN cruisers. A 5 inch 38 can citadel a Japanese cruiser. Train wrecked an Atago with an ATLANTA using AP.

[Sabene]

16k....sad but true.

Still, 60% win rate in ranked battles in the Atlanta.  It's a fun ship with multiple roles.  Being a pure damage dealer is not at the top of the list.  Being a headache to the other team might be.

 

Ignore the Atlanta on the opposing team.  It's a tier VII for goodness sake!  Won't hurt you.  Crap ship.  Liability to the other team.  Focus on the battleships!  Send in your destroyers.  Clearly an insta-win is in your grasp ...

 

nom nom nom

 

 

 

~ Sabene

[Arbinshire]

 

16k!? Ouch, just Ouch.

 

I average that in My Sims in ranked, which is another Tier 7 that can be competitive if played right, and that's only because I try to play the sneaky bugger who ninja caps.

 

Damage is important, but DDs can have a lot of influence over a game even with somewhat low damage. Even knowing a DD is lurking around somewhere can influence a match. In my opinion, DDs carry much more than battleships do, and cruisers as a whole have EXTREME difficulty with consistent carrying. The Atlanta is not a threat to anyone in their right mind, most certainly not to any DD who is good enough to accomplish something in a match, and killing DDs is something apparently people think the Atlanta can do well.

 

Destroyers are the gods of pressure and map control.