Jump to content


[FEEDBACK] Ranked Battles


  • Please log in to reply
63 replies to this topic

fighting_falcon93 #1 Posted 12 June 2017 - 03:44 PM

    Colonel

  • Player
  • 31233 battles
  • 3,919
  • Member since:
    02-05-2013

After 1 week of ranked battles I feel like I've tried it out enough to give some specific suggestions on improvements for this mode. WG has said multiple times that they do listen to feedback so I hope that they take this into consideration, because the mode itself has great potential.

 

Don't exclude players from the ratings

Every player that participated with atleast 1 battle in ranked battles should be included in the rankings for the entire season. First of all, giving players a ranking one day, and then suddenly drop them down massively the next day makes many players feel disappointed and as if they have been fooled. Secondly, excluding players from the rankings means that less players will fit into the different leagues, effectively meaning that less players will get rewards. This creates a situation where players invest a lot of time to play because they think they'll make it into a certain league, just in order to find out that so many players was excluded that they went into the bottom 50%. If it's too expensive to give 2000 gold to ~8000 players per month, then lower the rewards, but stop giving rewards to only the tiny uppermost part of the elite.

 

Switch the garage slot reward to 300 gold

All players have different needs. While some players might be in massive need of more garage slots, some other players might already have all garage slots they need. A player that doesn't need any more garage slots will after 1 year of ranked battles have ~52 additional garage slots that the player has no use of at all. So my suggestion is to change the garage slot reward to a gold reward of the same value. With this change players will still be able to buy garage slots if they need and other players might use it for something else, for instance permanent camo or crew role switch.

 

Remove the limited time window

Not all players can play in the same time of the day, and even those of us who can usually play during the time window, might sometimes have other things to do during a few of those hours, or even during the entire time frame. Instead allow players to play whenever they want, and if the problem is that you don't want people to spam too many battles per day, then only allow X amount of ranked battles per day.



Dr_ownape #2 Posted 12 June 2017 - 04:15 PM

    Major General

  • Player
  • 43508 battles
  • 5,487
  • [IDEAL] IDEAL
  • Member since:
    03-27-2013

feedback:

 

Easy game play

Nice rewards

 

Thanks WG

 

I didn't bother going to rank 5 as the rewards were pointless for me TBH. Playing ?? more battles for a garage slot - no thanks i have 25 empty slots. All i wanted was the 50% bonus silver rewards at rank 4. So yeah - perhaps change the rank 5 reward


Edited by Drownape, 12 June 2017 - 04:17 PM.


Kaltroh #3 Posted 12 June 2017 - 04:17 PM

    Sergeant

  • Player
  • 48730 battles
  • 244
  • Member since:
    05-30-2015

I agree to all. But, as far as I understood limited time window is for mm to work without long queues, therefor technical. At least they can add daily another time frame at earlier hours.



MrConway #4 Posted 12 June 2017 - 07:43 PM

    WoWs Community Manager

  • WG Staff
  • 13046 battles
  • 862
  • [CIRC] CIRC
  • Member since:
    10-03-2013

View Postfighting_falcon93, on 12 June 2017 - 03:44 PM, said:

After 1 week of ranked battles I feel like I've tried it out enough to give some specific suggestions on improvements for this mode. WG has said multiple times that they do listen to feedback so I hope that they take this into consideration, because the mode itself has great potential.

 

Don't exclude players from the ratings

Every player that participated with atleast 1 battle in ranked battles should be included in the rankings for the entire season. First of all, giving players a ranking one day, and then suddenly drop them down massively the next day makes many players feel disappointed and as if they have been fooled. Secondly, excluding players from the rankings means that less players will fit into the different leagues, effectively meaning that less players will get rewards. This creates a situation where players invest a lot of time to play because they think they'll make it into a certain league, just in order to find out that so many players was excluded that they went into the bottom 50%. If it's too expensive to give 2000 gold to ~8000 players per month, then lower the rewards, but stop giving rewards to only the tiny uppermost part of the elite.

 

Switch the garage slot reward to 300 gold

All players have different needs. While some players might be in massive need of more garage slots, some other players might already have all garage slots they need. A player that doesn't need any more garage slots will after 1 year of ranked battles have ~52 additional garage slots that the player has no use of at all. So my suggestion is to change the garage slot reward to a gold reward of the same value. With this change players will still be able to buy garage slots if they need and other players might use it for something else, for instance permanent camo or crew role switch.

 

Remove the limited time window

Not all players can play in the same time of the day, and even those of us who can usually play during the time window, might sometimes have other things to do during a few of those hours, or even during the entire time frame. Instead allow players to play whenever they want, and if the problem is that you don't want people to spam too many battles per day, then only allow X amount of ranked battles per day.

 

We absolutely do want to hear this kind of feedback! :)

 

Please consider also posting it in the relevant feedback thread in future: http://forum.worldof...ttles-feedback/



fighting_falcon93 #5 Posted 12 June 2017 - 07:45 PM

    Colonel

  • Player
  • 31233 battles
  • 3,919
  • Member since:
    02-05-2013

View PostMrConway, on 12 June 2017 - 07:43 PM, said:

We absolutely do want to hear this kind of feedback! :)

 

Please consider also posting it in the relevant feedback thread in future: http://forum.worldof...ttles-feedback/

 

Thank you :great:

 

And yes, I posted it there aswell ;)

http://forum.worldoftanks.eu/index.php?/topic/630641-update-919-ranked-battles-feedback/page__st__240__pid__14411046#entry14411046



ExclamationMark #6 Posted 12 June 2017 - 08:26 PM

    Colonel

  • Player
  • 16775 battles
  • 3,727
  • Member since:
    04-12-2013

View Postfighting_falcon93, on 12 June 2017 - 03:44 PM, said:

Remove the limited time window

Not all players can play in the same time of the day, and even those of us who can usually play during the time window, might sometimes have other things to do during a few of those hours, or even during the entire time frame. Instead allow players to play whenever they want, and if the problem is that you don't want people to spam too many battles per day, then only allow X amount of ranked battles per day.

PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE 

 

The amount of people coming online just for those 4 hours is causing me incredible lag, to the point where I'm really disinterested in playing it... as if that needed helping... 



brumbarr #7 Posted 12 June 2017 - 08:29 PM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 38626 battles
  • 6,326
  • Member since:
    07-30-2012

View Postfighting_falcon93, on 12 June 2017 - 03:44 PM, said:

. This creates a situation where players invest a lot of time to play because they think they'll make it into a certain league, just in order to find out that so many players was excluded that they went into the bottom 50%. If it's too expensive to give 2000 gold to ~8000 players per month, then lower the rewards, but stop giving rewards to only the tiny uppermost part of the elite.

 

 

Common falcon, we discussed and debunked this in the other thread to stop people spreading false info and get people angry at the 'elite'. Its jsut not true, its what many people not in the elite think, but once you improve to get there, you see it was a false claim invoced by the avg players.



ZlatanArKung #8 Posted 12 June 2017 - 08:50 PM

    Major General

  • Player
  • 1529 battles
  • 5,112
  • Member since:
    12-20-2014

View PostMrConway, on 12 June 2017 - 07:43 PM, said:

 

We absolutely do want to hear this kind of feedback! :)

 

Please consider also posting it in the relevant feedback thread in future: http://forum.worldof...ttles-feedback/

 

There are a few pretty long threads about why many dislike ranked here. May I suggest you read those threads?



erutrotti #9 Posted 12 June 2017 - 11:40 PM

    Corporal

  • Player
  • 43947 battles
  • 158
  • [268] 268
  • Member since:
    08-12-2011
That excluding thing is extremely annoying. Checked the league rankings late last night, was in the first one (there were over 5k people in the first league if I am not mistaken) and in the morning had dropped out to the bottom 50% (at this time the first league only had a bit under 500 players). So basically 90% players got dropped out meaning that 1% of those that played ended up in league 1. Now the result is fairly obvious, if you can't grind you [edited]of with the ranked battles, just don't. You wont get anything reasonable.

fighting_falcon93 #10 Posted 12 June 2017 - 11:45 PM

    Colonel

  • Player
  • 31233 battles
  • 3,919
  • Member since:
    02-05-2013

View Postbrumbarr, on 12 June 2017 - 08:29 PM, said:

Common falcon, we discussed and debunked this in the other thread to stop people spreading false info and get people angry at the 'elite'. Its jsut not true, its what many people not in the elite think, but once you improve to get there, you see it was a false claim invoced by the avg players.

 

Well I'll give it a try for the rest of the month, so we'll see what that brings me in terms of rewards. The rating is public so it should be fairly easy to see if the claim was true or false ;) Please don't get me wrong, I have nothing against good players, but from an above average players perspective that's just how it feels :(

Edited by fighting_falcon93, 12 June 2017 - 11:45 PM.


WindSplitter1 #11 Posted 12 June 2017 - 11:55 PM

    Major

  • Player
  • 16025 battles
  • 2,560
  • [ORDEM] ORDEM
  • Member since:
    02-07-2016

View Postfighting_falcon93, on 12 June 2017 - 06:45 PM, said:

 

Good job, FightingFalcon. Very good job! :)

You have my respect. :medal:



fighting_falcon93 #12 Posted 12 June 2017 - 11:59 PM

    Colonel

  • Player
  • 31233 battles
  • 3,919
  • Member since:
    02-05-2013

View PostWindSplitter1, on 12 June 2017 - 11:55 PM, said:

You have my respect. :medal:

 

Even when I complain about arta? :trollface:



WindSplitter1 #13 Posted 13 June 2017 - 12:03 AM

    Major

  • Player
  • 16025 battles
  • 2,560
  • [ORDEM] ORDEM
  • Member since:
    02-07-2016

View Postfighting_falcon93, on 12 June 2017 - 10:59 PM, said:

 

Even when I complain about arta? :trollface:

 

ESPECIALLY when you complain about arta. :)

Hope to see more of both from you ;)



CrispyKittenBaconPanda #14 Posted 13 June 2017 - 01:38 AM

    Private

  • Player
  • 19553 battles
  • 7
  • Member since:
    03-17-2016

Posted my thoughts in the official threa, after misplacing it here.

 

http://forum.worldof...#entry14412959.


Edited by 8Lagged, 13 June 2017 - 02:25 AM.


ZlatanArKung #15 Posted 13 June 2017 - 07:33 AM

    Major General

  • Player
  • 1529 battles
  • 5,112
  • Member since:
    12-20-2014

View Postfighting_falcon93, on 12 June 2017 - 11:45 PM, said:

 

Well I'll give it a try for the rest of the month, so we'll see what that brings me in terms of rewards. The rating is public so it should be fairly easy to see if the claim was true or false ;) Please don't get me wrong, I have nothing against good players, but from an above average players perspective that's just how it feels :(

 

I found a 49% Wr guys who averaged 30+ games/night of ranked in league 1.



truoste #16 Posted 13 June 2017 - 07:54 AM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 38045 battles
  • 1,365
  • Member since:
    08-20-2013

Biggest issue with the mode is rewards but I presume that is just what WG intended so nothing will change that just like recent "fun" premium line which can be labeled as over powered but also balanced if bad player plays the offender against better player in tvp. 

 

Next biggest issue is absolutely (sorry for my homophopic slurs here) retarded incentive i.e. top 3 players of losing team getting chevrons. This causes players not to play for team which makes the gameplay absolute crap. Please change this so that winning team top 10 gets chevrons (even 10 is too much in my opinion as it is participation medal, not contribution what it should be) and top 5 players from losing team NOT LOSING chevron. This alone would give better incentive to actually contribute towards victory.

 

 



ZlatanArKung #17 Posted 13 June 2017 - 07:58 AM

    Major General

  • Player
  • 1529 battles
  • 5,112
  • Member since:
    12-20-2014

View Posttruoste, on 13 June 2017 - 07:54 AM, said:

Biggest issue with the mode is rewards but I presume that is just what WG intended so nothing will change that just like recent "fun" premium line which can be labeled as over powered but also balanced if bad player plays the offender against better player in tvp. 

 

Next biggest issue is absolutely (sorry for my homophopic slurs here) retarded incentive i.e. top 3 players of losing team getting chevrons. This causes players not to play for team which makes the gameplay absolute crap. Please change this so that winning team top 10 gets chevrons (even 10 is too much in my opinion as it is participation medal, not contribution what it should be) and top 5 players from losing team NOT LOSING chevron. This alone would give better incentive to actually contribute towards victory.

 

 

 

I would advocate a system where only good players get to rank 5 (and pretty fast) while average or bad players will never get there no matter how many battles they play.



truoste #18 Posted 13 June 2017 - 08:04 AM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 38045 battles
  • 1,365
  • Member since:
    08-20-2013

View PostZlatanArKung, on 13 June 2017 - 06:58 AM, said:

 

I would advocate a system where only good players get to rank 5 (and pretty fast) while average or bad players will never get there no matter how many battles they play.

 

That would be much better but I have a funky feeling that WG does not want that. They want even the mediocore bob to get to rank 5 if they can just endure enough games (and lose crapload of credits while they do that). There is nothing ranked in ranked battles now... only skill one needs is decide when the game starts wheter or not it is going to be likely loss and then contribute meanifully to the loss... i.e. let team mates die and farm dmg.

 

Saddest part is rewards... why would they want to give better equipment to more seasoned players? Makes no sense at all expect piss on newer players face... if one likes that sort of thing.


Edited by truoste, 13 June 2017 - 08:06 AM.


ZlatanArKung #19 Posted 13 June 2017 - 08:14 AM

    Major General

  • Player
  • 1529 battles
  • 5,112
  • Member since:
    12-20-2014

View Posttruoste, on 13 June 2017 - 08:04 AM, said:

 

That would be much better but I have a funky feeling that WG does not want that. They want even the mediocore bob to get to rank 5 if they can just endure enough games (and lose crapload of credits while they do that). There is nothing ranked in ranked battles now... only skill one needs is decide when the game starts wheter or not it is going to be likely loss and then contribute meanifully to the loss... i.e. let team mates die and farm dmg.

 

Saddest part is rewards... why would they want to give better equipment to more seasoned players? Makes no sense at all expect piss on newer players face... if one likes that sort of thing.

 

WG is pretty good at pissing of their players, so good that they might even like it.



Soifon99 #20 Posted 13 June 2017 - 08:28 AM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 35711 battles
  • 402
  • [04502] 04502
  • Member since:
    01-21-2013

View Posttruoste, on 13 June 2017 - 07:54 AM, said:

Biggest issue with the mode is rewards but I presume that is just what WG intended so nothing will change that just like recent "fun" premium line which can be labeled as over powered but also balanced if bad player plays the offender against better player in tvp. 

 

Next biggest issue is absolutely (sorry for my homophopic slurs here) retarded incentive i.e. top 3 players of losing team getting chevrons. This causes players not to play for team which makes the gameplay absolute crap. Please change this so that winning team top 10 gets chevrons (even 10 is too much in my opinion as it is participation medal, not contribution what it should be) and top 5 players from losing team NOT LOSING chevron. This alone would give better incentive to actually contribute towards victory.

 

 

 

This ,

 

They should make the ranked something like this.

 

Top 10 don't lose chevron, bottom 5 do,    top 10 winning team get a chevron, and bottom 5 don't 

 

there should be a way to stop the super hard redline camping slow paced game play... i played until rank 4, but everybody plays super careful because they don't wanne die in the beginning.. and when the team is losing all the smart players drop back and use the rest of the team as cannon fodder to do dmg to get in the top 3.. 

 

And they should also remove the just play enough games and get to rank 5 even if you are a tomato noob..   there is not much skill in failing yourself up to rank 5, but just giving the top 10 a chevron is a good start.. maybe even top 8.... so only the people who really try hard to win get a chevron. 


Edited by Soifon99, 13 June 2017 - 08:30 AM.





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users