Ranked Season Four Thoughts and Yorck Semi-Review

[NoZoupForYou]

My thoughts on season 4 of ranked including the grind and the keep your star feature. Also includes a mini Yorck review and how it fares in ranked.  Gameplay is a nail biter of a ranked match.

[atPrick__]

Zoup, looks like you are in a aircraft in you avatar pic, or maybe an MRAP?

 

Are you still active in the Army?

 

Great video and I agree with pretty much everything in regards to Ranked, hopefully WG will take some notice from your opinions and all the other well know contributors.

[Crucis]

I'm gonna sound like a party pooper here, but why do people feel some incredible need to do videos just to express opinions?  Is it so damned difficult to just type them out so we don't have to waste 15+ minutes on a video?

 

I'm going to watch/listen to this video because I do want to hear this guy's thoughts on Ranked Battles, but in all honesty, I'd have MUCH rather read them in plain ol' black and white text.

 

 

[atPrick__]

I'm gonna sound like a party pooper here, but why do people feel some incredible need to do videos just to express opinions?  Is it so damned difficult to just type them out so we don't have to waste 15+ minutes on a video?

 

I'm going to watch/listen to this video because I do want to hear this guy's thoughts on Ranked Battles, but in all honesty, I'd have MUCH rather read them in plain ol' black and white text.

 

 

 

page views?

 

he has a You Tube page and wants content for it?

 

He has a [edited]load of subs so he must be doing something right...

[TheBlackWind]

I'm gonna sound like a party pooper here, but why do people feel some incredible need to do videos just to express opinions?  Is it so damned difficult to just type them out so we don't have to waste 15+ minutes on a video?

 

I'm going to watch/listen to this video because I do want to hear this guy's thoughts on Ranked Battles, but in all honesty, I'd have MUCH rather read them in plain ol' black and white text.

 

 

 

Do you know about Youtube? It's where people express opinions in video. It's pretty popular  

 

Actually I'm kinda with you, but we are far and away in the minority. People want to SEE the ship in action. It's probably along the lines of "Would you rather read a book or see a movie?" Most people will choose the latter.

[Crucis]

I'm gonna sound like a party pooper here, but why do people feel some incredible need to do videos just to express opinions?  Is it so damned difficult to just type them out so we don't have to waste 15+ minutes on a video?

 

I'm going to watch/listen to this video because I do want to hear this guy's thoughts on Ranked Battles, but in all honesty, I'd have MUCH rather read them in plain ol' black and white text.

 

 

 

Do you know about Youtube? It's where people express opinions in video. It's pretty popular  

 

Actually I'm kinda with you, but we are far and away in the minority. People want to SEE the ship in action. It's probably along the lines of "Would you rather read a book or see a movie?" Most people will choose the latter.

 

 

TBW, I'm not really talking about ship reviews where showing a ship in action has some actual value.  I'm talking about the Ranked Battles thoughts where any video shown would seem to me to be nothing but filler, rather than having any actual value.

[Crucis]

I'm gonna sound like a party pooper here, but why do people feel some incredible need to do videos just to express opinions?  Is it so damned difficult to just type them out so we don't have to waste 15+ minutes on a video?

 

I'm going to watch/listen to this video because I do want to hear this guy's thoughts on Ranked Battles, but in all honesty, I'd have MUCH rather read them in plain ol' black and white text.

 

 

 

page views?

 

he has a You Tube page and wants content for it?

 

He has a [edited]load of subs so he must be doing something right...

 

Last I knew, this forum wasn't youtube, unless Google bought out WG in the last few minutes. 

 

 

[CrazyHorse_Denver]

Thanks for the video. I've been slowly improving my game play in the Yorck and watching someone play her properly is a big help. A bigger boost in confidence is knowing that even above average players run into islands; but seriously twice in one game, even I'm not that bad.

[atPrick__]

 

Last I knew, this forum wasn't youtube, unless Google bought out WG in the last few minutes. 

 

 

 

there is a big You Tube button on the message interface, every video that gets plastered on YT is advertisement for WG. It is literally one of the only URLs you can directly Copypasta onto the forums....

 

 

[NoZoupForYou]

Zoup, looks like you are in a aircraft in you avatar pic, or maybe an MRAP?

 

Are you still active in the Army?

 

Great video and I agree with pretty much everything in regards to Ranked, hopefully WG will take some notice from your opinions and all the other well know contributors.

 

Aircraft somewhere over Northern Iraq. Still serving.  14 years and going strong.

[Killjoy1941]

Last I knew, this forum wasn't youtube, unless Google bought out WG in the last few minutes. 

 

Think of it as an audio book. You can go do something else and still hear what he has to say. That's what I do if I'm not viewing something which requires my attention on the screen.

[El_Swamp_Rat]

I always thought the Yorck was under rated as well. Thanks for the video...

The Budyonny was my go-to ship in ranked, but I should have tried the Yorck.

[NoZoupForYou]

I'm gonna sound like a party pooper here, but why do people feel some incredible need to do videos just to express opinions?  Is it so damned difficult to just type them out so we don't have to waste 15+ minutes on a video?

 

I'm going to watch/listen to this video because I do want to hear this guy's thoughts on Ranked Battles, but in all honesty, I'd have MUCH rather read them in plain ol' black and white text.

 

 

 

As a community contributer for Wargaming, they kind of like me doing it ;)  I get where you are coming from though, and outside of reviews and a few other video series I have, I rarely do these types of videos.  But with ranked being over, the time was right and these are issues that need to be solved.

 

[atPrick__]

 

Aircraft somewhere over Northern Iraq. Still serving.  14 years and going strong.

 

The cabin looks similar, just wondering. Spent a couple hundred hours fighting a Mx-15 in one

 

[Crucis]

I'm gonna sound like a party pooper here, but why do people feel some incredible need to do videos just to express opinions?  Is it so damned difficult to just type them out so we don't have to waste 15+ minutes on a video?

 

I'm going to watch/listen to this video because I do want to hear this guy's thoughts on Ranked Battles, but in all honesty, I'd have MUCH rather read them in plain ol' black and white text.

 

 

 

As a community contributer for Wargaming, they kind of like me doing it ;)  I get where you are coming from though, and outside of reviews and a few other video series I have, I rarely do these types of videos.  But with ranked being over, the time was right and these are issues that need to be solved.

 

 

I guess that I'm just kind of old fashioned and prefer the written word, at least where it seems appropriate.

 

That said, I don't really disagree with anything you said about ranked.  OTOH, I've written a number of posts on the topic, including a rather lengthy one in Pigeon's feedback thread.

 

One of the most important points is that there needs to be a common understanding about what the point of Ranked Battles really is, because without that, it's not really a good idea to try to come up with solutions without agreeing on the most basic of things, i.e. what's the point of Ranked.  Why?  Without a basic understanding of the point of RkD Battles, some solutions might "move the needle" towards that point while others might mode the needle away from that point.  Mind you, all of these "solutions" might be perfectly good ideas.  They just might not be the right idea for for the "right" problem.

 

Is the point of Ranked to find the best players?  Or is it to winnow out the most dedicated players who are willing to suffer through the grind to Rank 1?  Or is it just some glorified "mission" in a different format?  And does the current format even actually identify those best players, or is it really just identifying those with the patience to suffer through the grind and are good enough to make the necessary progress when combined with their patience?

 

One thing that bothers me about Ranked are those who don't take them seriously.  I may not have the patience to suffer through the long grind, but when I do play, I'm absolutely 100% playing to win.  I don't like getting stuck with "it's just a game" casual players to treat RkB's like they're pubs with smaller teams.  IMO, if you don't take the competition seriously, you should just stay in pubs or co-op (whichever floats your boat).  That said, I don't see any way that the devs could fix this gripe, so (shrug) what can you really do, except vent about it once in a while?

 

 

 

[Turbotush]

First!  Thank you for your service!

 

Had such a great time in the previous seasons and was able to rank out in them.  Meet a lot of good players, made some connections and just really liked how it was done.  This season, not so much.  As a matter of fact I hated every time I queued up for a ranked battle, but I was determined to finish what I started.  The players were ether arrogant dipweeds or flag farming potatoes, WG silence was disappointing and the star system was a mistake but it is what we asked for.  Made it to R5.3 - 3 times in 996 battles with a dismal 46% WR and settled for Rank 7. 

 

The advice I would add for anyone thinking about Ranked in the future is to:

1. Get on a team.
2. Division when ever you can, even If you do not know the others well.
3. Get Teamspeak and Discord (this might not be necessary since WG is working on a communications/voice chat system in the game).
4. When the season starts get with your team to review tactics being used. (I didn't get the memo on not fast capping and using smoke on BB's).
5. Ignore the salt, but try to get what they are trying to say.
6. Train!  If you run a DD, train in a DD.  If you are running a BB, then train in a BB.  You can not practice enough.
7. Don't go into a ranked battle with a low tier, non upgraded ship!  You might as well just say to the team "Screw you, I'll do what I want, I'm a troll". 

 

I was in a few matches with you and was amazed at how well the York preformed!  I hope WG dose limit it to 1 tier, It broke my heart every time I queued up and there was a T6 on my team.

 

I agree with all your points, but I don't think WG will do anything about it.  I just don't see them thinking there is a problem.  I predict season 5 will be just the same.

[Crucis]

Turbo, I honestly don't see the point of divisioning like you suggest above.  I honestly more often than not play worse when divisioned than when playing solo.  But I feel like I do well in team environments.  The same was true for me in WoT as well, where I wasn't a huge fan of platooning, but was comfortable in tank companies, team battles, and clan wars.

 

My best guess is that when I'm playing in team format battles, I'm following the caller's orders and I'm fine with that.  And when I play solo, I do my own thing and am laser focused on my own play.  But when I'm in a division, I'm just not able to focus on my own play as well as work around my division mates.  I usually feel constrained to pay attention to what they're doing rather than having my full and undivided attention on fighting my own ship.  Honestly, I'm more comfortable trying to time in with clan mates than divisioning up with them so that I don't feel as pressured to support my division mates.  I don't have this problem with rank battles teams, even though there's no caller giving orders.  I don't have to support division mates over others on the team.  I'm just playing my own game and supporting my ENTIRE team, not a subset of it. 

 

 

 

 

[crzyhawk]

 

The cabin looks similar, just wondering. Spent a couple hundred hours fighting a Mx-15 in one

 

MX 15 eh?  I used to be an instructor on the MX20 And HISAR/Lynx radars aboard ARL-M, a modified dehavilland Dash 7.  I also got to train MX15 in a jam for USCG's HU-25 and for Algerian MMSA.

[NoZoupForYou]

 

The cabin looks similar, just wondering. Spent a couple hundred hours fighting a Mx-15 in one

 

Yes indeed...  Took a flight as a spectator with task force ODIN.

[NoZoupForYou]

 

I guess that I'm just kind of old fashioned and prefer the written word, at least where it seems appropriate.

 

That said, I don't really disagree with anything you said about ranked.  OTOH, I've written a number of posts on the topic, including a rather lengthy one in Pigeon's feedback thread.

 

One of the most important points is that there needs to be a common understanding about what the point of Ranked Battles really is, because without that, it's not really a good idea to try to come up with solutions without agreeing on the most basic of things, i.e. what's the point of Ranked.  Why?  Without a basic understanding of the point of RkD Battles, some solutions might "move the needle" towards that point while others might mode the needle away from that point.  Mind you, all of these "solutions" might be perfectly good ideas.  They just might not be the right idea for for the "right" problem.

 

Is the point of Ranked to find the best players?  Or is it to winnow out the most dedicated players who are willing to suffer through the grind to Rank 1?  Or is it just some glorified "mission" in a different format?  And does the current format even actually identify those best players, or is it really just identifying those with the patience to suffer through the grind and are good enough to make the necessary progress when combined with their patience?

 

One thing that bothers me about Ranked are those who don't take them seriously.  I may not have the patience to suffer through the long grind, but when I do play, I'm absolutely 100% playing to win.  I don't like getting stuck with "it's just a game" casual players to treat RkB's like they're pubs with smaller teams.  IMO, if you don't take the competition seriously, you should just stay in pubs or co-op (whichever floats your boat).  That said, I don't see any way that the devs could fix this gripe, so (shrug) what can you really do, except vent about it once in a while?

 

 

 

 

thanks...  I agree as well.  While I know I may not make it to rank one, I'm in it 100 percent to win.  It amazes me how many stick hulls come out, which tells me, and I don't mean this is a bad way, the wrong type of player is coming to rank.  

Really I think there should be a gold cup for serious players that is t7-8 and a silver cup for t5-6 which has more irrevocable ranks and a lesser reward.  Choose your ranked based on your time, skill and goals.

[atPrick__]

Yes indeed...  Took a flight as a spectator with task force ODIN.

[Turbotush]

Turbo, I honestly don't see the point of divisioning like you suggest above.  I honestly more often than not play worse when divisioned than when playing solo.  But I feel like I do well in team environments.  The same was true for me in WoT as well, where I wasn't a huge fan of platooning, but was comfortable in tank companies, team battles, and clan wars.

 

My best guess is that when I'm playing in team format battles, I'm following the caller's orders and I'm fine with that.  And when I play solo, I do my own thing and am laser focused on my own play.  But when I'm in a division, I'm just not able to focus on my own play as well as work around my division mates.  I usually feel constrained to pay attention to what they're doing rather than having my full and undivided attention on fighting my own ship.  Honestly, I'm more comfortable trying to time in with clan mates than divisioning up with them so that I don't feel as pressured to support my division mates.  I don't have this problem with rank battles teams, even though there's no caller giving orders.  I don't have to support division mates over others on the team.  I'm just playing my own game and supporting my ENTIRE team, not a subset of it. 

 

 

 

 

 

Funny, but I am the same way!  And that's my point.  In ranked you sort of are in a div, it's just bigger.  So for me, I am trying to get in more div's to better train myself for ranked.  Works for me (I hope!).  You all ready are a very good player, might not be what you need to do. 

[Crucis]

 

I guess that I'm just kind of old fashioned and prefer the written word, at least where it seems appropriate.

 

That said, I don't really disagree with anything you said about ranked.  OTOH, I've written a number of posts on the topic, including a rather lengthy one in Pigeon's feedback thread.

 

One of the most important points is that there needs to be a common understanding about what the point of Ranked Battles really is, because without that, it's not really a good idea to try to come up with solutions without agreeing on the most basic of things, i.e. what's the point of Ranked.  Why?  Without a basic understanding of the point of RkD Battles, some solutions might "move the needle" towards that point while others might mode the needle away from that point.  Mind you, all of these "solutions" might be perfectly good ideas.  They just might not be the right idea for for the "right" problem.

 

Is the point of Ranked to find the best players?  Or is it to winnow out the most dedicated players who are willing to suffer through the grind to Rank 1?  Or is it just some glorified "mission" in a different format?  And does the current format even actually identify those best players, or is it really just identifying those with the patience to suffer through the grind and are good enough to make the necessary progress when combined with their patience?

 

One thing that bothers me about Ranked are those who don't take them seriously.  I may not have the patience to suffer through the long grind, but when I do play, I'm absolutely 100% playing to win.  I don't like getting stuck with "it's just a game" casual players to treat RkB's like they're pubs with smaller teams.  IMO, if you don't take the competition seriously, you should just stay in pubs or co-op (whichever floats your boat).  That said, I don't see any way that the devs could fix this gripe, so (shrug) what can you really do, except vent about it once in a while?

 

 

 

 

thanks...  I agree as well.  While I know I may not make it to rank one, I'm in it 100 percent to win.  It amazes me how many stick hulls come out, which tells me, and I don't mean this is a bad way, the wrong type of player is coming to rank.  

Really I think there should be a gold cup for serious players that is t7-8 and a silver cup for t5-6 which has more irrevocable ranks and a lesser reward.  Choose your ranked based on your time, skill and goals.

 

 

NoZoup, I've also thought that there should be two "conferences" (using that word so that I don't overuse a different word like "league").  One conference for the less serious players and one for the more serious players.But unlike the current ranked structure where all of the ranks form a single large grouping where you could progress from rank 20-something to rank 1, I'd suggest that these two "conferences" be separate. 

 

For this example, I'll use your terms, gold and silver.  The Silver Conference would be for players with WR's of below 50% at the start of the season, and possibly not having any non-premium ship above a certain tier, and maybe a certain number of games played.  The Silver Conference would be for more casual and less talented players.  And the Gold Conference would be for players who exceed the Silver Conference standards, i.e. a WR above 50%, more games played (i.e. more in-game experience), and so on.  You could only be in one conference or the other.  And the standards should probably be constructed so that it's not possible to qualify for both conferences.

 

 

One thing I would absolutely NOT support is the use of a tier 7-8 tier pair.  It was an excellent decision by the devs to drop down to a 6-7 tier pair because tiers 6 and 7 are much closer together in capability than tiers 7 and 8.  Fully upgraded tier 6 ships are capable of hanging with tier 7 ships. Tier 6 BB's are about the same speed as tier 7 BB's, which is NOT true for tier 7 and 8 BB's..  Tier 6 DD's aren't all that difference from tier 7 DD's, and there's no upgrade module that creates an unfair advantage between the tier 6 and 7 DDs, as there is with tier 7 and 8 DD's.  IMO tier 8 ships should only be used in Ranked if they're only allowing a single tier.  But if they're using tier pairs as they've done thus far to date, then tier 6-7 should be the highest tier pair.

 

 

[crzyhawk]

The way I think they should do it is organize the "leagues" into three tiers:  Blue, Red, and White (modelled from the old RN squadron colors).  You need say, 5 stars to progress to the next "rank", starting from "captain".  After you gain your five stars in a T6 ship, you are promoted to "Commodore of the Blue" and you are awarded a blue USN commodore pennant as your flag.  5 more stars earns you your next rank, rear admiral of the blue.  5 more for vice, and 5 more for your four star admiral flag.  Once you gain five stars, you are promoted to Commodore of the red (and the red league, T7), and are awarded an IJN commodore pennant.  From here, you need SIX stars to progress to rear admiral of the red, and your IJN rear admiral pennant.  The pattern continues through, until you gain gain your commodore of the white (RN Commodore), join the white league (T8).  Now you need 7 stars to progress through each rank in the white league and gain your British admirals flags.  After becoming admiral of the white, to gain that last rank, you need 8 stars to gain the jolly roger.  Flags would be permanent for people to display their accomplishments.  It's not right that players like me who put in 15ish games to get the Midway flag have the exact same thing to show for it as people like LWM, NoZoup, and Turbo but busted tail and just fell short.  Let people earn their ranks and display it for everyone what they've accomplished.  If we'll throw money at them for flags, I can assume that people will participate for ranked flags as well.  We seem to like flags and think they are awesome.

 

- each rank should be irrevocable

- all members of the losing team lose stars, no heroes.  You win or lose together.

- members of the winning team who do not earn 300 base exp lose stars.  Show up, make an effort and produce.  If you're dead weight, you should get nothing out of the carry.

- members of the winning team who do not make 800 base exp do not GAIN stars (300-800= no status change)  800 points in a ranked match shouldn't be too hard.  If you can't do that, you don't deserve to move up.  This requires a bit of consistency on the player.  You have to win AND produce in order to move up.  I think that should filter out a lot of the fail to the top kind of play.

 

What I think this system would do is prevent the rage and frustration that come with revocable ranks...hopefully the toxicity would be toned down as a loss is not crippling and demoralizing.  More stars to level makes it progressively harder to make rank, and setting minimum contributions keeps people from being afk carried by bot spamming the queues.  Perhaps make that final push from admiral of the white to the jolly roger done with T9's to keep people from buying their way in.

[Crucis]

The way I think they should do it is organize the "leagues" into three tiers:  Blue, Red, and White (modelled from the old RN squadron colors).  You need say, 5 stars to progress to the next "rank", starting from "captain".  After you gain your five stars in a T6 ship, you are promoted to "Commodore of the Blue" and you are awarded a blue USN commodore pennant as your flag.  5 more stars earns you your next rank, rear admiral of the blue.  5 more for vice, and 5 more for your four star admiral flag.  Once you gain five stars, you are promoted to Commodore of the red (and the red league, T7), and are awarded an IJN commodore pennant.  From here, you need SIX stars to progress to rear admiral of the red, and your IJN rear admiral pennant.  The pattern continues through, until you gain gain your commodore of the white (RN Commodore), join the white league (T8).  Now you need 7 stars to progress through each rank in the white league and gain your British admirals flags.  After becoming admiral of the white, to gain that last rank, you need 8 stars to gain the jolly roger.  Flags would be permanent for people to display their accomplishments.  It's not right that players like me who put in 15ish games to get the Midway flag have the exact same thing to show for it as people like LWM, NoZoup, and Turbo but busted tail and just fell short.  Let people earn their ranks and display it for everyone what they've accomplished.  If we'll throw money at them for flags, I can assume that people will participate for ranked flags as well.  We seem to like flags and think they are awesome.

 

- each rank should be irrevocable

- all members of the losing team lose stars, no heroes.  You win or lose together.

- members of the winning team who do not earn 300 base exp lose stars.  Show up, make an effort and produce.  If you're dead weight, you should get nothing out of the carry.

- members of the winning team who do not make 800 base exp do not GAIN stats (300-800= no status change)  800 points in a ranked match shouldn't be too hard.  If you can't do that, you don't deserve to move up.  This requires a bit of consistency on the player.  You have to win AND produce in order to move up.  I think that should filter out a lot of the fail to the top kind of play.

 

What I think this system would do is prevent the rage and frustration that come with revocable ranks...hopefully the toxicity would be toned down as a loss is not crippling and demoralizing.  More stars to level makes it progressively harder to make rank, and setting minimum contributions keeps people from being afk carried by bot spamming the queues.  Perhaps make that final push from admiral of the white to the jolly roger done with T9's to keep people from buying their way in.

 

 

I disagree that your system would prevent rage and frustration.  I think that setting the bar so high would produce rage in those players who are producing a respectable, average level of production when it doesn't award them with a star.  That's wrong.  It's one thing to punish truly poor producers.  It's quite another to punish those who are merely average.  If anything, your system is elitist and for that reason is a total fail in my book.