Jump to content


Ranked Battles: New Season Begins September 18


  • Please log in to reply
407 replies to this topic

fighting_falcon93 #21 Posted 11 September 2017 - 07:02 PM

    Brigadier

  • Player
  • 32010 battles
  • 4,119
  • Member since:
    02-05-2013

View PostGepard_PH, on 11 September 2017 - 05:45 PM, said:

1. The prime time limitations are in place to ensure quick matchmaking into Ranked Battles and avoid potential battle rigging in off-peak time. We didn't choose 18:00-00:00 arbitrarily, it's just the majority of players is online at these hours.

2. I'm sorry to contradict you here, but this is not true. The median of Ranked Battles for League I players in the 1st beta season was around 550 battles in 4 weeks, which is less than 20 battles per day. That's probably like 2 hours of gameplay or a bit more. And there were also players who made it to the top league with less than 300 ranked battles played.

3. Yes, we give a garage slot, which players would have to otherwise pay for with gold.

4. Daily mission does not require a victory. The top 10 in your team requirement is a pretty standard one and I'm pretty sure most players agree it's a good idea to keep such requirements for missions as to not reward potential AFKers etc. Besides, this daily mission is a reward for commitment (as the name implies), it's not supposed to make you mhmm-rich, but rather give an extra few thousand credits per battle you may be spending due to highly competitive nature of Ranked Battles (compared to similar Tier X only Random Battles).

5. Yes, vehicle ranks are still there for the most dedicated of our players to still have a goal after reaching Rank 5. They are also a way to distinguish further between all Rank 5 players at the end of the stages and the season. With enough dedication you can potentially earn a lot of leaderboard points in a short time, but we don't want to take away this opportunity from players who, for example, won't be able to participate in all stages.

6. It may be difficult for some players to end up in League I-III at the end of the season, that's why we actually increased rewards for Ranks during stages. Now you don't need to end up in top 50% of the leaderboard to earn considerable amount of Bonds. You can simply get to Rank 5 in each stage :)

7. Gold is just the additional reward and it's not the best motivation either. The main prize is Bonds and we hope it will be attractive enough for players to give Ranked Battles a try.

8. Gold and Bonds are used for different things. If you could use Bonds for the same things you use gold, they would be called gold :)

 

1. The reason rigging is possible in the first place is because of the dumb chevron system. If you'd have used a better ranking system, like average base XP or even a real ELO-rating, it wouldn't be as easy to rig. Also, by that thinking, why allow random battles 24/7? It's quite easy to rig personal missions in random battles aswell. The solution is to ban the riggers, not punish the players that play by the rules but maybe can't play on specified times every day.

 

2. So the median player played 20 battles per day? First of all, where do you think the median player was placed in the ranking? Around the middle would seem logical... And what kind of reward do you get if you're placed in the middle? Do you see the problem? And secondly, 20 battles per day, where one battle is around 8 minutes is equal to 160 minutes, or 2 hours and 40 minutes, of gaming per day. And that is only ranked battles. How do you expect people to finance these gold spammed battles? How do you expect people to grind new tier 10s? That takes additional time on top of those 160 minutes. Playing for 160 minutes every single day is very much if you have other things in life to attend to.

 

3. Why? Why do you insist on doing this even when players have strongly adviced you to not do this? This is why players get the impression that you're not listening to your customers. Let me explain why this is a problem. Player Bob has all tanks in his garage that he's currently interested in. He pays for premium account, so he's helping to finance the games development, but he thinks that the premium cost is enough, he does not want to also buy gold. When playing ranked battles he gets yet another useless garage slot that he doesn't even need, instead of getting a small kind amount of 300 gold that he could have had so much more use for. And yet WG insists that the garage slot is the way to go.

 

4. But you're still missing the point. Being top 10 on xp 10 times will require atleast 10 battles, and playing 10 battles will cost way more than the rediculous 50'000 credits that the mission is handing out. How do you expect players to be able to continue playing this game mode for the 160 minutes you previusly mentioned, if they have no credits left? Or do you expect all players to buy Fort Knox packages once per week? Take a look at the statistic data, how much credits does the average player lose each ranked battle? Now multiply that by 10. You see the difference? Players will bleed credits, and you expect them to be able to keep playing for 160 minutes every single day?

 

5. So you're thinking about players that have already reached rank 5 during the first 2-3 days... What about the players that actually have a work or school and can't play so much every day? I hope you realise that it's the working players that actually finance your product, because these are the players that can afford to keep buying the premium tanks that WG pumps out each month. However these players can't compete with players that can play from 18:00-00:00, simply because these players will grind so many vehicle ranks. I think it's time for WG to make up their minds, is this game mode about grind or skill?

 

6. "Increased rewards during stages"? Let's assume for a while that average player Bob manages to reach rank 5 before going insane and throwing his computer out of the window, what does he actually get? 1 day of premium? Or consumables? Or are you talking about the 1000 bonds? It will "only" take him 2 seasons to get 1 equipment... And then we have those garage slots that you insist on keeping instead of giving out the 300 gold instead. I bet players will greatly appreciate to have 100 empty garage slots, but hey, they got "rewarded", right?

 

7. "Not the best motivation"? May I ask how you know this? Have you actually asked your average players what they value more; Bonds that can be used to buy equipment that give a rediculous improvement boost of a whopping 2.5%, or, some gold that can actaully allow these players to get permanent camo on atleast a few tanks, or to demount equipment for free, or to change their 10 highly trained radio operators into commanders? Or maybe even to save it up so they can get that 1 premium tank they always wanted after 4-5 years of being loyal customers?

 

8. But you're missing the point. Players getting into league 1 get 2000 gold for free, that they can use for stuff like permanent camo, demounting equipment, changing role of crew members. Why are you giving so much gold to 10% of the participators, and then leave nothing to the majority? Don't you think that's unfair? Do you really think that average players will continue to play this with these kind of rewards? Why can't you spread it out so everyone gets atleast something but the actual amount corresponds to your rank? It's super simple to fix, look here:

 

((total_players_participated - player_rank_position + 1) / total_players_participated) * 2000 gold

 

See how easy it's to make players motivated to keep playing and getting better? If it's too much gold for WG, you can always change 2000 gold into 1000 or even 500. But it's about giving all players a motivation to keep playing. Right now you're only giving that motivation to the players that already are on top. What do you think will happen when the majority, the average players, stop playing ranked battles? The game mode will die.

 

All these problems are so easy to fix. Players have even pointed out what they are and possible solutions to them. But no, WG is determined that they know the best what the players want (for instance 100 empty garage slots instead of 300 gold), so they just keep going. Untill this game mode hits the wall aswell. And then it will be another "ooops". It already happened with rubicon and WG didn't learn a thing.

 

Why am I even writing all this? It will fall on deaf ears anyway...


Edited by fighting_falcon93, 11 September 2017 - 07:10 PM.


armandio #22 Posted 11 September 2017 - 07:28 PM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 80058 battles
  • 2,047
  • Member since:
    04-19-2011

View Postarmandio, on 11 September 2017 - 03:51 PM, said:

WG logic -

4 weeks = marathon,

3 weeks = sprint.

:)

 

WG logic -

Rewards

League 1 -  4750 bonds  - personal reserves 10 - gold 2000 - premium days 7

 

 

League 2 - 2250 bonds - personal reserves 5 - gold 1000 - premium days 7

 

 

League 3 - 750 bonds - personal reserves 5 - gold 500 - premium days 1 - garage slot 1

 

If we take Top 3 places as logic, ONLY gold suits logic -   1st place 2000 gold

                                                                               2nd place 1000 gold

                                                                               3rd place 500 gold.

Other rewards have no logic at all. :ohmy:

 

My logic: if we take WG gold reward for ranked as basic

 

Rewards:

League 1 - 4000 bonds - personal reserves 20 - gold 2000 - premium days 8 - garage slots 4

 

League 2 - 2000 bonds - personal reserves 10 - gold 1000 - premium days 4 - garage slots 2

 

League 3 - 1000 bonds - personal reserves 5 -   gold 500 -   premium days 2 - garage slots 1

 

50% out of any League but counted in Leader board  get 100 bonds - 100 gold - 1 premium day.

:)

P.S.

League 1 -  4750 bonds  -League 2 - 2250 bonds looks very strange and suspicious for customer.

It looks like You did mathematical-profitable counting, to not lose Your profit, that looks stupid.

Why exactly 4750 bonds for 1st league? Why?:facepalm:

And exactly 2250 for 2nd league? Why?:facepalm:


Edited by armandio, 12 September 2017 - 01:54 AM.


Horcan #23 Posted 11 September 2017 - 07:34 PM

    The Great Hunter

  • Player
  • 59185 battles
  • 448
  • [DACUS] DACUS
  • Member since:
    01-30-2011

View Postarmandio, on 11 September 2017 - 06:00 PM, said:

 

Really?:trollface:

 

In last warships ranked battles 7th season You have played ONLY 27 battles with 33% win rate.You climb only to 17th rank from 21.

 

Do You really think You can prefer warships rank system instead of WoT rank system?

Why You blame WoT rank system and compare it with warships rank system if You dont play warships ranked battles?!?

You just like to came to WoT forum and release your real life stress?!?:teethhappy:

 

I never said i reached rank 1 or anything, or that i play warships like a madman. Im not much into warships, and i never played ranked battles there because of that and other factors, like unlucky streak or not having ships with high enough tier. I only stated that i consider that system way better designed, allowing people with lower tier to at least get some ranks, also people having a shot at first rank ( first place ) just like that no lifers that score 15-20 or more tank ranks in first week of first season with this stupid system WoT have.I played first season and scored 17 points with something like one rank 5+1 , twice rank 4 and one 3. Spending quite some hours for it. I got 1700 bonds that i couldnt buy anything with it, and didnt made it  it top 50 % or what was needed for placing into leagues. Was it worth the waste of time? Hell no. Do i think this season will be different? Hell no. Will i play more than a few games a week? Hell no , i cant compete with people scoring 10-15 tank ranks each week so i have no motivation to play it with rewards being as bad as they are.

If the warship system would be used here it would be more interesting, considering i have 240+ tanks in garage and i would progresively used higher tiers ( more diversity for games ) instead of boring games with 50-75% of tanks same russian meds, bats , tvp and a few maus/type , maybe some td's. Do i need credits and consumables? No, i have 19 millions and maybe around 2k premium consumables stacking in depot. Would i prefer some camouflages,emblems, inscriptions maybe a piece of equipment directly when reaching a certain rank, maybe gold along the way? A premium tank even tier 5-6 at end of season? Definetly yes.



armandio #24 Posted 11 September 2017 - 07:40 PM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 80058 battles
  • 2,047
  • Member since:
    04-19-2011

View PostHorcan, on 11 September 2017 - 08:34 PM, said:

 

I never said i reached rank 1 or anything, or that i play warships like a madman. Im not much into warships, and i never played ranked battles there because of that and other factors, like unlucky streak or not having ships with high enough tier. I only stated that i consider that system way better designed, allowing people with lower tier to at least get some ranks, also people having a shot at first rank ( first place ) just like that no lifers that score 15-20 or more tank ranks in first week of first season with this stupid system WoT have.I played first season and scored 17 points with something like one rank 5+1 , twice rank 4 and one 3. Spending quite some hours for it. I got 1700 bonds that i couldnt buy anything with it, and didnt made it  it top 50 % or what was needed for placing into leagues. Was it worth the waste of time? Hell no. Do i think this season will be different? Hell no. Will i play more than a few games a week? Hell no , i cant compete with people scoring 10-15 tank ranks each week so i have no motivation to play it with rewards being as bad as they are.

If the warship system would be used here it would be more interesting, considering i have 240+ tanks in garage and i would progresively used higher tiers ( more diversity for games ) instead of boring games with 50-75% of tanks same russian meds, bats , tvp and a few maus/type , maybe some td's. Do i need credits and consumables? No, i have 19 millions and maybe around 2k premium consumables stacking in depot. Would i prefer some camouflages,emblems, inscriptions maybe a piece of equipment directly when reaching a certain rank, maybe gold along the way? A premium tank even tier 5-6 at end of season? Definetly yes.

 

There wasnt diversity in warships ranked, especially in higher ranks.

Last season only Fuso and Farragut and japan destroyer, cant remember name.Mostly only 3 ships.

Reward tanks You can get in personal missions or CW campaigns, there must be some difference in battle modes.

You will see some kind of diversity in 2nd ranked beta season, cause map pool include more city maps.More HT in ranked, less arty.

I will laugh when arty players take arty and get Ensk and die in 1st minute cause ranked are more skilled then random.:teethhappy:


Edited by armandio, 11 September 2017 - 07:45 PM.


Partibrejker0 #25 Posted 11 September 2017 - 07:49 PM

    Corporal

  • Player
  • 61329 battles
  • 188
  • Member since:
    12-01-2012

After the first season (yes I have finished in First League, among top 500 players) and all the pain (lost time, lost credits and ton of lost nerves) - ranked battles never again! 

Besides, my black list grew to the maximum after the first season. There was at least one player added to my black list every battle, literally. On top of that, I have started doing things that I have never done in my whole wot life - adding the whole or most of my team to my black list. Those were campers, like ones that camp beside or behind arty in light or a medium tank, or idiots that push you, block you, run over you....

 

Ranked battles promote not cooperation but the most selfish feelings and acts a tanker can think of. I do not need that again! 

 

PS Hope that grand battles will not be terminated. So, if I want to play tier X and not CW, grand battles is the best format to do so, when I feel like wanna play it...


Edited by Jagodinac1, 11 September 2017 - 07:50 PM.


AlucardPina #26 Posted 11 September 2017 - 07:53 PM

    Lance-corporal

  • Player
  • 50241 battles
  • 59
  • [ELCC] ELCC
  • Member since:
    05-27-2013

one more time low and sad rewards

one more time camping on the red line It will be the dish of the day.

one more time the schedule of the battles it is not good

one more time it wil be HEAT to win 

one more time 1 vs 29 zoo apes because wot its a anti team game

one more time warpacks/mods to win 

one more time WG  completely ignored criticism and suggestions from players

one more time WG astronomically failed in the creation of Ranked Battles

GG WG GG 

You are just good at making premium tanks.

GG WG GG 

the offices of WG are full [edited]??? or you are just to blind????

 

 



ogremage #27 Posted 11 September 2017 - 09:01 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 34067 battles
  • 1,421
  • [KAZNA] KAZNA
  • Member since:
    06-26-2011
Sad rewards. If I have to shoot tons of gold to compete I expect more credit rewards. I'd like to play, but if it means giving up on buying new tanks then whatever. 

Homer_J #28 Posted 11 September 2017 - 10:27 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Beta Tester
  • 29664 battles
  • 31,295
  • [WJDE] WJDE
  • Member since:
    09-03-2010

View Postfighting_falcon93, on 11 September 2017 - 07:02 PM, said:

 

Why am I even writing all this? It will fall on deaf ears anyway...

 

Why indeed, it's still beta.  If it's as bad as you say then it will fail and then they will have to rethink it.

 

The problem is too many suckers fell for it last time round, which made it appear that they had got it right.



Steeltank141 #29 Posted 11 September 2017 - 11:43 PM

    Sergeant

  • Player
  • 17545 battles
  • 271
  • [4STAR] 4STAR
  • Member since:
    01-26-2015

Here is my feedback on why i still won't be playing this mode:

1: Its a credit sink.

2: The gold spam is fecked up sometimes.

3: The rewards are stupid and not personal.  

4: Its stops me from grinding in normal battle mode.

 

Given point 3 and 4 i would love to see some choise in rewards and rewards that help you in the normal battle mode. For example: a certain rank gives you a good amount of free xp that you can use for grinding in standard battles (To get past a horrible stock gun or so) Or a certain rank gives you discount on a tank that you want(a sort of chrismas tree reward). 

In that way i can play ranked battles and still be able to make progress in the normal game due to the usefull rewards. Bonds are a good reward for players that have all the tier 10's already (and want to make them a little more OP) but for me the ranked battles have nothing to go for atm.

 

Just my 2 cents.

 



laulaur #30 Posted 12 September 2017 - 12:18 AM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 46980 battles
  • 1,296
  • [FUSED] FUSED
  • Member since:
    08-11-2011

This is the best part of the news article :coin::trollface:

 



Mav75 #31 Posted 12 September 2017 - 12:54 AM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 30915 battles
  • 1,553
  • Member since:
    10-04-2013
Good, you removed Mountain Pass from rotation. But you added even worse maps to the rotation (Pilsen, Paris) for crying out loud.

fighting_falcon93 #32 Posted 12 September 2017 - 01:30 AM

    Brigadier

  • Player
  • 32010 battles
  • 4,119
  • Member since:
    02-05-2013

View Postlaulaur, on 12 September 2017 - 12:18 AM, said:

This is the best part of the news article :coin::trollface:

 

 

Ofc they did, the whole idea behind these "ranked battles" is to sell more Fort Knox bundles :D

ecefec #33 Posted 12 September 2017 - 03:03 AM

    Lance-corporal

  • Player
  • 49111 battles
  • 76
  • [LVTD] LVTD
  • Member since:
    04-07-2011

The problem is all team camp, and no one wants move.

 

 

 

How about personal missions in this mode? Like get spot dmg, kill 3 enemy TDs... It will make more fun for avarage players



Zhongze_Li #34 Posted 12 September 2017 - 06:48 AM

    Sergeant

  • Player
  • 8660 battles
  • 206
  • Member since:
    10-29-2015

View PostGepard_PH, on 11 September 2017 - 05:45 PM, said:

2. I'm sorry to contradict you here, but this is not true. The median of Ranked Battles for League I players in the 1st beta season was around 550 battles in 4 weeks, which is less than 20 battles per day. That's probably like 2 hours of gameplay or a bit more. And there were also players who made it to the top league with less than 300 ranked battles played.

 

If you need 2 hours per day everyday in 3 weeks to get something..... how about no? It's still a grinding competition with skill factored in. If you want to remove the grind factor then give us more time.



Pjovejas #35 Posted 12 September 2017 - 07:01 AM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 16400 battles
  • 304
  • [LTUSP] LTUSP
  • Member since:
    02-14-2015

View PostGepard_PH, on 11 September 2017 - 05:45 PM, said:

 

 

2. I'm sorry to contradict you here, but this is not true. The median of Ranked Battles for League I players in the 1st beta season was around 550 battles in 4 weeks, which is less than 20 battles per day. That's probably like 2 hours of gameplay or a bit more. And there were also players who made it to the top league with less than 300 ranked battles played.

Are you telling us, that 20 battles among good players last only 2 hours? than means 6 minutes single battle on average? Are you kidding me? Because good players tend to survive longer, not to die in the first third of the battle.

Edited by Pjovejas, 12 September 2017 - 07:13 AM.


Gepard_PH #36 Posted 12 September 2017 - 08:36 AM

    Publishing Producer

  • WG Staff
  • 20185 battles
  • 1,829
  • [WG] WG
  • Member since:
    04-05-2013

View PostPelion, on 11 September 2017 - 06:52 PM, said:

 

Thanks for the data.  It's interesting that you choose to post it publicly - and unfortunate that you didn't post the minimum for league 1.  

 

Don't you think it undermines a supposedly "skill based" mode if people are having to play around 2 hours per day, 7 days per week, for 4 weeks in order to get the top rewards?

 

I take your second sentence to mean that the very highest skilled players still needed almost 300 battles to reach the top rank.

 

Don't you think you are rewarding grinding more than skill when the most skilled players have to play more than an hour per day, 7 days per week for 4 weeks straight to get the top ranks and rewards?

 

The data is publicly available, all you need to do is go in-game, click Ranked Battles and check the results of last season.

The lowest number of battles player needed to reach League 1 was around 225.

Does it undermine the skill factor? Not at all. To enter League 1 in beta season, 34 rank points were needed. You'd get 20 points for reach Rank 5 each of 4 weeks, and you'd still need 14 more point for vehicle ranks. Quick calculations and you see that you needed at least (1+3+3+5+7)*4 + 14*5 = 156 battles to get those 34 points, and that's if you win 100% of your battles. Considering that you can lose chevrons and ranks, I'd say achieving this in 225 battles only is impressive.

Also, if you check results, you'll see that many players in League 1 are extraordinary tankers with 60%+ win rate (not only in RB, but overall).

 

So yeah, I'm sure that Ranked Battles actually reward skilled players.

 

 



undutchable80 #37 Posted 12 September 2017 - 08:55 AM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 8180 battles
  • 2,046
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    10-30-2014
possible n00b question, but why only tier X? Can't we have ranked battles across all tiers, or will that just invite good players to "seal club" the lower tiers...? Or will ranked battles across all tiers become an option after the results of this second beta test?

cro001 #38 Posted 12 September 2017 - 09:27 AM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 30189 battles
  • 2,203
  • Member since:
    10-21-2012

View Postundutchable80, on 12 September 2017 - 08:55 AM, said:

possible n00b question, but why only tier X? Can't we have ranked battles across all tiers, or will that just invite good players to "seal club" the lower tiers...? Or will ranked battles across all tiers become an option after the results of this second beta test?

 

Because tier 10 is end game that needs end game content. Get good and grind out tier 10.

Geno1isme #39 Posted 12 September 2017 - 09:40 AM

    General

  • Player
  • 43969 battles
  • 8,432
  • [TRYIT] TRYIT
  • Member since:
    09-03-2013

View PostGepard_PH, on 12 September 2017 - 09:36 AM, said:

Does it undermine the skill factor? Not at all. To enter League 1 in beta season, 34 rank points were needed. You'd get 20 points for reach Rank 5 each of 4 weeks, and you'd still need 14 more point for vehicle ranks. Quick calculations and you see that you needed at least (1+3+3+5+7)*4 + 14*5 = 156 battles to get those 34 points, and that's if you win 100% of your battles. Considering that you can lose chevrons and ranks, I'd say achieving this in 225 battles only is impressive.

 

I think you misunderstood the point he was trying to make: No matter how good you are, the mode requires a massive time investment to end up in the ladder, not to mention league 1. And the top places are more about time investment for farming vehicle ranks (which are almost twice as cheap as rank 5 which is just silly). So while the mode requires a certain amount of skill for sure it still is just another massive grindfest. Even that "impressive" result in "just" 225 battles is like 25 hours of time invested (assuming ~10 battles per hour which is probably optimistic) and your median over 50 hours. So most people who don't play WoT full time and can't or don't want to play ranked exclusively get screwed over basically.
 

Also the way the ladder works will destroy this mode pretty soon, esp. with the changes to the ranks: You make it harder to achieve rank 5, so less people will achieve the minimum score for the leaderboard, so the total seasonrewards will shrink significantly. On the other hand you make it easier to farm points with vehicle ranks so the threshold to get into the reward ranks will rise. Do you really think this will motivate people below the top 1% to invest time and resources in this mode?


Edited by Geno1isme, 12 September 2017 - 09:49 AM.


undutchable80 #40 Posted 12 September 2017 - 09:41 AM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 8180 battles
  • 2,046
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    10-30-2014

View Postcro001, on 12 September 2017 - 09:27 AM, said:

 

Because tier 10 is end game that needs end game content. Get good and grind out tier 10.

 

Ah, that makes sense.

 

Hahaha, yes Sir! Will do! :honoring:






2 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 2 guests, 0 anonymous users