Jump to content


WoT 9.19 Common Test: Ranked Battle Feedback Thread


  • Please log in to reply
93 replies to this topic

dance210 #1 Posted May 03 2017 - 23:06

    Community Specialist

  • Administrator
  • 24207 battles
  • 4,439
  • [D4NCE] D4NCE
  • Member since:
    05-31-2012

Hello, tankers! 

 

We have released the WoT 9.19 Common Test client! 

This CT version features ranked battles and more.

 

Please leave detailed feedback regarding Ranked Battles in this thread.

 

Ranked Battle notes:

Spoiler

 



Sturm_Teufel #2 Posted May 05 2017 - 19:19

    Major

  • Players
  • 40138 battles
  • 3,586
  • Member since:
    07-22-2011

Are they planning on fixing their major screw up with light tanks and bring the ELC back to what it should be also?

 

Also, on a positive note, the ranked battles (along with the reward potential to motivate players) looks great. And finally fixing SOS & BIA so they work together is fantastic, so thanks WG for that.

NOW PLEASE FIX THE LIGHT TANKS YOU GUYS RUINED.:great:


Edited by Sturm_Teufel, May 05 2017 - 19:25.


fred_632 #3 Posted May 05 2017 - 20:03

    Sergeant

  • -Players-
  • 4404 battles
  • 118
  • [TBM] TBM
  • Member since:
    09-15-2015

With regards to Ranked Battles, it might succeed or fail, but What I don't like is the fact that you play you lose the battle and then lose your rank, I was Rank 4 with 1 chevron lost the battle and lost my rank went back to Rank 3. Now that might be the cause of Ranked Battles failing, But its still earlyy lets wait and see and it's really just too damn expensive and that's not even playing with premium ammo.

 

And my question is how do the Bonds work now, if I'm Rank 4 do I get all the Bonds under Rank 4 as well? Like Rank 1 is 100 Bonds Rank 2 is 200 Bonds Rank 3 is 300 Bonds and Rank 4 is 400 Bonds. So do I get only 400 Bonds or do I get 1000 Bonds

 

 



histotoxic #4 Posted May 05 2017 - 20:34

    Corporal

  • -Players-
  • 5260 battles
  • 25
  • Member since:
    12-10-2015

Get. Rid. Of. Bond. Equipment.

We absolutely do not need, by any stretch of the imagination, more things that only the best players can acquire. Giving good ranked players improved versions of things like vents, rammer, etc is a slippery slope that leads to the players who are already dominating pubs to be dominating even further and inevitably leads to players who are Joe average or such begging to have these bonds put into the premium store.

Nobody asked for this.. I've heard nobody praise this. Did we learn nothing from Rubicon?

 

Aside from that, what's the deal with the model change of the Pz. VII tier X heavy? Anyone have information on what changed?



Zulu__Dawn #5 Posted May 05 2017 - 21:42

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 31755 battles
  • 581
  • [-_-] -_-
  • Member since:
    10-29-2011

Quick observation that has me really concerned about the whole "ranked" battles thing.

 

You guys...Wargaming Devs should greatly consider the method of progression up the ranks.  As it is now or as it is written, I believe players progress up the ranks by "personal performance" and being in either the TOP 12 on the winning team or being in the TOP 3 on the losing team.

 

It seems as though in the grand scheme of things that there is no other requirement to becoming a top ranked player other than SPAMMING a ton of games.  This whole progression up the ranks format that the DEVS have established is super dependent on QUANTITY of "Ranked Battles" played and in reality has nothing to do with SKILL at all.  In your release notification Wargaming makes it seem as though skilled players are being rewarded...but we are not.  In my opinion your method of progression mechanic chosen is terrible!!!  It seems a BOT can climb up the ranks faster than a skilled player the way the rules are written now.

 

Scenario 1:  Person A who has the time to sit and play all day long on a Saturday (and for the sake of numbers let's say plays 300 matches in a day) will rocket up the rank list really fast.  This same player A who plays 300 matches may win only 100 or 33%.  But will still log 100 wins and possibly will log over 80-85 top 12's and will earn 80-85 Chevrons in 1 day.

 

Scenario 2:  Person B who plays on the same Saturday who only logs 100 games on that Saturday...but wins at a 60% rate will log 60 wins and possibly at a 100% top 12 rate will earn 60 Chevrons.

 

Ultimately the less skilled Player A who does nothing but BOT or Spam games in the scenario I have listed above will be placed higher on the RANKED list over the clearly superior skilled Player B.  In IMHO this is terrible and is not how a "TOP RANKED" player should be defined.  A BOT or player who plays like a BOT doing very little for the team but enough to earn a top 12 should not even be in consideration for a top rank position.

 

2 POSSIBLE SOLUTIONS

 

1st Proposed Change: I feel that this TOP 12 is way to generous and I suggest that the only way a person should earn a Chevron is if they make TOP 5 on a win (or top 1/3 of the team) and/or TOP 1 on a loss.  Clearly defining TOP RANKED as such and rewarding a player for it.

 

2nd Proposed Change: Issue a player the amount of chevrons based on their actual position when they are on the winning team.  Starting with the #1 Player (top player) earning 1 full chevron for being on the winning team.  All players below him/her earn a "PORTION" of a chevron based on their position...so the #2 player would earn 1/2 Chevron, the number 3 player would earn 1/3 Chevron, continue this method all the way down to the 10th position.  So a player who wins a ranked battle and is in the 10th position for experience would earn 1/10th of a Chevron.  That way the BOT type player spamming battles and being the 10th player in every battle would take 10 battles to earn the same 1 full Chevron as the great player who carried the team to victory!!!

 

Final Summation:

You cannot give the snowflakes a blue ribbon for last place or a participation trophy just for hitting the Battle button...it will ruin/destroy the whole idea of "RANKED" battles and you will soon find that this will be GONE the same way RAMPAGE is now gone.  You have to reward the player who carry's his team on his back and drags along the 12th guy on the list who camps in the back all game and is number 12 because the 3 other guys who camped with him died 1st!!!

 

A Point about BONDS and "Specials":

Lastly, as most people are alluding to and already complaining about...as well as myself:  DO NOT ALLOW these NEW SKILL BOOSTS and NEW EQUIPMENT ITEMS to be used in STANDARD BATTLES.  Allow them to be used in CW, Strongholds and when released the new 30 X 30 Battles.  Special skills and equipment should be just that "special" and should be restricted to "Special or Unique" battles.

 

Zulu

 

 



saru_richard #6 Posted May 05 2017 - 22:28

    Major

  • -Players-
  • 19791 battles
  • 2,074
  • [H-H] H-H
  • Member since:
    08-19-2015
just saying i think there may be a bug in the TS, i tried to play a random battle after playing a rank battle and it got stuck on the joining part of it

RicoViking9000 #7 Posted May 05 2017 - 22:46

    Corporal

  • -Players-
  • 2300 battles
  • 85
  • Member since:
    01-31-2017
I want to do a ranked game, but I'm stuck in the queue for a random battle, and reloading the client does nothing

Unknown0ne #8 Posted May 05 2017 - 23:54

    Captain

  • WGLNA Gold League Player
  • 27362 battles
  • 1,081
  • [BULBA] BULBA
  • Member since:
    07-28-2010

View PostZulu__Dawn, on May 05 2017 - 15:42, said:

Quick observation that has me really concerned about the whole "ranked" battles thing.

 

You guys...Wargaming Devs should greatly consider the method of progression up the ranks.  As it is now or as it is written, I believe players progress up the ranks by "personal performance" and being in either the TOP 12 on the winning team or being in the TOP 3 on the losing team.

 

It seems as though in the grand scheme of things that there is no other requirement to becoming a top ranked player other than SPAMMING a ton of games.  This whole progression up the ranks format that the DEVS have established is super dependent on QUANTITY of "Ranked Battles" played and in reality has nothing to do with SKILL at all.  In your release notification Wargaming makes it seem as though skilled players are being rewarded...but we are not.  In my opinion your method of progression mechanic chosen is terrible!!!  It seems a BOT can climb up the ranks faster than a skilled player the way the rules are written now.

 

Scenario 1:  Person A who has the time to sit and play all day long on a Saturday (and for the sake of numbers let's say plays 300 matches in a day) will rocket up the rank list really fast.  This same player A who plays 300 matches may win only 100 or 33%.  But will still log 100 wins and possibly will log over 80-85 top 12's and will earn 80-85 Chevrons in 1 day.

 

Scenario 2:  Person B who plays on the same Saturday who only logs 100 games on that Saturday...but wins at a 60% rate will log 60 wins and possibly at a 100% top 12 rate will earn 60 Chevrons.

 

Ultimately the less skilled Player A who does nothing but BOT or Spam games in the scenario I have listed above will be placed higher on the RANKED list over the clearly superior skilled Player B.  In IMHO this is terrible and is not how a "TOP RANKED" player should be defined.  A BOT or player who plays like a BOT doing very little for the team but enough to earn a top 12 should not even be in consideration for a top rank position.

 

 

The players on the losing team who aren't in the top 3 lose a chevron. A 33% win rate player that plays 300 games is probably going to lose almost 200 chevrons from the losses alone, far more than they'll get from the wins.



Wildblade #9 Posted May 06 2017 - 04:54

    Staff sergeant

  • Players
  • 40569 battles
  • 270
  • [REL2] REL2
  • Member since:
    02-21-2012

View PostZulu__Dawn, on May 05 2017 - 15:42, said:

Quick observation that has me really concerned about the whole "ranked" battles thing.

 

You guys...Wargaming Devs should greatly consider the method of progression up the ranks.  As it is now or as it is written, I believe players progress up the ranks by "personal performance" and being in either the TOP 12 on the winning team or being in the TOP 3 on the losing team.

 

It seems as though in the grand scheme of things that there is no other requirement to becoming a top ranked player other than SPAMMING a ton of games.  This whole progression up the ranks format that the DEVS have established is super dependent on QUANTITY of "Ranked Battles" played and in reality has nothing to do with SKILL at all.  In your release notification Wargaming makes it seem as though skilled players are being rewarded...but we are not.  In my opinion your method of progression mechanic chosen is terrible!!!  It seems a BOT can climb up the ranks faster than a skilled player the way the rules are written now.

 

Scenario 1:  Person A who has the time to sit and play all day long on a Saturday (and for the sake of numbers let's say plays 300 matches in a day) will rocket up the rank list really fast.  This same player A who plays 300 matches may win only 100 or 33%.  But will still log 100 wins and possibly will log over 80-85 top 12's and will earn 80-85 Chevrons in 1 day.

 

Scenario 2:  Person B who plays on the same Saturday who only logs 100 games on that Saturday...but wins at a 60% rate will log 60 wins and possibly at a 100% top 12 rate will earn 60 Chevrons.

 

Ultimately the less skilled Player A who does nothing but BOT or Spam games in the scenario I have listed above will be placed higher on the RANKED list over the clearly superior skilled Player B.  In IMHO this is terrible and is not how a "TOP RANKED" player should be defined.  A BOT or player who plays like a BOT doing very little for the team but enough to earn a top 12 should not even be in consideration for a top rank position.

 

2 POSSIBLE SOLUTIONS

 

1st Proposed Change: I feel that this TOP 12 is way to generous and I suggest that the only way a person should earn a Chevron is if they make TOP 5 on a win (or top 1/3 of the team) and/or TOP 1 on a loss.  Clearly defining TOP RANKED as such and rewarding a player for it.

 

2nd Proposed Change: Issue a player the amount of chevrons based on their actual position when they are on the winning team.  Starting with the #1 Player (top player) earning 1 full chevron for being on the winning team.  All players below him/her earn a "PORTION" of a chevron based on their position...so the #2 player would earn 1/2 Chevron, the number 3 player would earn 1/3 Chevron, continue this method all the way down to the 10th position.  So a player who wins a ranked battle and is in the 10th position for experience would earn 1/10th of a Chevron.  That way the BOT type player spamming battles and being the 10th player in every battle would take 10 battles to earn the same 1 full Chevron as the great player who carried the team to victory!!!

 

Final Summation:

You cannot give the snowflakes a blue ribbon for last place or a participation trophy just for hitting the Battle button...it will ruin/destroy the whole idea of "RANKED" battles and you will soon find that this will be GONE the same way RAMPAGE is now gone.  You have to reward the player who carry's his team on his back and drags along the 12th guy on the list who camps in the back all game and is number 12 because the 3 other guys who camped with him died 1st!!!

 

A Point about BONDS and "Specials":

Lastly, as most people are alluding to and already complaining about...as well as myself:  DO NOT ALLOW these NEW SKILL BOOSTS and NEW EQUIPMENT ITEMS to be used in STANDARD BATTLES.  Allow them to be used in CW, Strongholds and when released the new 30 X 30 Battles.  Special skills and equipment should be just that "special" and should be restricted to "Special or Unique" battles.

 

Zulu

 

 

 

I'm pretty sure that if you are in the bottom three of the winners or the bottom 12 of the losers you lose chevrons, so you tomato with 300 games would still be rock bottom...

AznTank #10 Posted May 06 2017 - 05:13

    Corporal

  • WGLNA Bronze League Player
  • 28526 battles
  • 87
  • [OTTER] OTTER
  • Member since:
    06-10-2011

Things I like

-It's some form of skilled play

-Rewards for skilled play

-Better UI

-Devs are doing something and offering more information on their work, still want to see more.

Things I don't like

-Premium Spam. Oh my god the premium spam is real. I don't want to play a match where my armor gets turned into swiss cheese all. the. time. How can you tell me to play a super heavy on the front line if I can't survive half the time from getting spammed by APCR/HEAT or Prem HE (don't get me started on that). Do we still have to deal with this? Premium ammo is something that needs a massive overhaul. The differences between ammunition need to be greater. You can't be a fully competitive player unless you're spamming it. It's honestly one of the things that holding back this game from getting a bigger presence in eSports. (that and the monumental amount of rng, honestly, that crap is annoying)

-Experience is tied heavily to damage, so it should be easier for those tanks with higher dpm to place higher on the score board. This makes it hard for tanks with low damage or low mobility to be competitive, like slow super heavies, arty, and light tanks. Instead of buffing everything, why not give them some other forms of earning exp? I remember the devs tried to make tanking for exp work, maybe it'll work here. But unless you're a Type 5 Heavy spamming Prem HE (so. freaking. cancer.), it might be hard for the Maus to finish higher on the score board.

-Top 12 is a bit too generous. The skill gap between finishing 1st, and 12th is pretty big.

-Not enough Ranks. If we're running +-1 between ranks, the spread between skill is too wide I feel. A game with one or two people a whole rank higher cannot possibly remain competitive if they are driving a weak tank. Most games have a wide spread of ranks and positions like CSGO or OverWatch because there's such a wide gap between good and poor players, Wot is no different. 5 is nothing. We need something of a better or more prominent ELO system.

-These Bonds and improved equipment look very bad...I'm an above average player but I don't want to make it even harder for those below to remain competitive. The differences in Crew Skills and Equipment already make it hard enough and if anything they all need reworking/rebalancing too. I think WoT should offer different forms of rewards such as Premium time, Special Camo, or even some amounts of Gold for finishing high on the Ranked Scoreboard. At this moment 10k credits is chump change. That doesn't even buy a module or cover repairs in one game.

-Tier X exclusive? Why not start at Tier 6 or 8? There's already clan wars for those tiers, why not give them competitive ranked aspect? There's plenty of poor players at any tier, but by tier 6 or 8 most of the players should be able to play with some skill. You already have loads of premium tanks for those tiers too. 

Things missing

-Not enough punishment for those that team damage or kill consistently. If you turn blue, I think you should be temporarily banned from Ranked, you're weighting down the team heavily.

-MASSIVE BUG, you need to REPRESS your WASD keys once your tracks are repaired. In game people repair the tracks and immediately move, I've seen players and myself take an extra shot because we need to repress the movement key.

-Still have to work on balancing maps

TLDR: 

Ranked Idea is there, Not enough ranks to spread skill, Bonds and Improved Equipment look very dangerous and like Rubicon changes, A bit too tier restrictive, Premium spam, Premium spam again.



Unknown0ne #11 Posted May 06 2017 - 08:18

    Captain

  • WGLNA Gold League Player
  • 27362 battles
  • 1,081
  • [BULBA] BULBA
  • Member since:
    07-28-2010

Improved equipment and directives is something I doubt very many people want added: Conferring on the best players (or more generally, a limited subset of players) non-skill-based advantages adds nothing of value to the game. 

 

As a "good" player who can likely do relatively well in ranked battles, getting improved equipment and directives isn't a reward. Instead, improved equipment and directives being added to the game is a punishment. Their addition makes them almost a requirement for high level competitive play. This turns a game mode I would play for fun and the chance to win some nice prizes into something I am expected to grind so I can outfit all of my competitive tier Xs for clan wars (in my personal case, clan wars campaigns specifically). 

 

Further, I don't want a greater advantage in random battles that would come with this system; that doesn't make the game better, and it certainly doesn't make it more fair. New(er) players are already at a significant disadvantage in terms of what they have available to them; with more limited access to tank modules (e.g. stock versus fully upgraded), crews, premium rounds, equipment, and consumables all playing a part in how well they perform. Not to mention the players who suffer most from these are also often the players who are the least experienced at the game, effectively compounding their lack of experience.

 

The addition of improved equipment and directives will not only further the gap between new players and highly skilled veterans though, it will also create gaps that didn't exist before, between players who play (and do well in) ranked battles and those who do not. Again, I don't see how this improves the game (or makes WG more money): How is creating more artificial disparities beneficial to the majority of players in the game?

 

In addition, for "high level" competitive play there's already a long and hard path to reach a point where one's account has the resources to be truly competitive at tier X. The requirement for a number of specific tier X tanks (especially with tank locking), highly skilled crews for each of those tanks. Along with simpler things like equipment and consumables. Adding another barrier on that path in the form of improved equipment and directives is detrimental to the game: A strong competitive scene is good for the game; people who are apart of communities (clans or tournament teams) are far more likely to stick around and invest more time (and money) into the game. A strong competitive scene with good rewards encourages such communities to form, grow, and improve: it creates goals players can work towards after they have a garage full of tier X tanks. However, if the barrier of entry is too high; the goal too far, it will discourage players who otherwise would have become far more engaged in the game. To this end, it needs to be easier for new players to reach competitive parity in terms of their accounts versus long-time players, not harder.

 

 

Please, don't add improved equipment and directives. There is plenty of other ways to reward players who do well in ranked battles without giving them an advantage over everyone else.



RoyalGreenPC #12 Posted May 06 2017 - 09:46

    Captain

  • Players
  • 17029 battles
  • 1,050
  • [R-7] R-7
  • Member since:
    07-27-2013

Top 12 players of winning team getting same amount of chevron is not very fair. 1st player on xp and 12th player on xp did had very different roles for the team's win.

 

My proposal with 5 steps of rewarding:

+2  Top 1-3 from winning team gets two chevrons.

+1  Top 4-10 from winning team and top 3 from losing team gets one chevron.

+0  11-12 of winning team and 4-5 of losing team gets 0 chevron, but don't lose any chevron either.

-1  13-15 of winning team and 6-12 of losing team loses a chevron.

-2  13-15 of losing team loses two chevrons.



Avalon304 #13 Posted May 06 2017 - 10:13

    Major

  • Players
  • 16095 battles
  • 6,014
  • [CMFRT] CMFRT
  • Member since:
    09-04-2012
I think, if WG is dead set on introducing improved equipment, that every one should get 3 free pieces (of their choosing) when the patch goes live. That way everyone can equip a tank for ranked (or just equip a tank in general) and then no one is at a disadvantage even if they dont really play ranked.

LpBronco #14 Posted May 06 2017 - 11:29

    Captain

  • Beta Testers
  • 36188 battles
  • 1,946
  • [_F_] _F_
  • Member since:
    11-19-2010

Now we want to give everyone a participation trophy and they don't even have to play.

 

I tried the mode and I will play it "as is" but allowing the bonus equipment to be deployed in randoms where everyone won't have equal access would be wrong. I may be mistaken as the only tanks able to play the advanced equipment are tier 10's and they may be the only tanks capable of using this feature if this goes live; in which case, I would save all these reserves for Advances, Ranked battles, and Clan Wars as using them in pubs would just be a waste. I wouldn't worry too much about what numbers they pull away from the random games as I see pretty much the same players who play these team games anyway also being the ones who will play ranked battles. 



TornadoADV #15 Posted May 06 2017 - 11:48

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 21707 battles
  • 631
  • [ESC] ESC
  • Member since:
    01-05-2012
People complaining about advantages granted by equipment that's less then food, something everybody can buy. Just lulz. :harp:

Unknown0ne #16 Posted May 06 2017 - 12:19

    Captain

  • WGLNA Gold League Player
  • 27362 battles
  • 1,081
  • [BULBA] BULBA
  • Member since:
    07-28-2010

View PostTornadoADV, on May 06 2017 - 05:48, said:

People complaining about advantages granted by equipment that's less then food, something everybody can buy. Just lulz. :harp:

 

Someone can have food, improved equipment, and directives. What exactly is your point?

 

Any advantage, regardless of how small, is still an advantage. There's already more than enough non-skill-based advantages to be had in the game; why is yet another one needed?



Vortex747 #17 Posted May 06 2017 - 13:40

    Corporal

  • -Players-
  • 15759 battles
  • 59
  • [FUSON] FUSON
  • Member since:
    04-24-2016

I really don't understand the arguments you guys are presenting here. If there is no incentive to invest time in this game mode, no one will play it. This mode only has value if a significant part of the top tier player base is interested. I think the 12/3 ratio on payouts is correct. It removes the drowners and the 0 damage muppets but the rest of the team benefits from a win, so winning becomes more important than individual stats. If you carry a losing team, you still get the benefit of your effort. In terms of the rewards, a 5% DPM increase is not a make or break difference but it's not nothing. It will make competitive players put time and effort into this game mode, the people who don't care today will still not care.


 

I really like the idea of ranked battles, I like that there are no platoons. I like the idea that they matter. I want to see what 30 top ranked players from different clans can do playing together as individuals. This will either be an incredibly fun, competitive experience OR the most toxic cesspool known to the WOT universe!



Ldy_Tanker #18 Posted May 06 2017 - 18:55

    Private

  • -Players-
  • 5070 battles
  • 4
  • [SWP50] SWP50
  • Member since:
    03-31-2015

cant play cant evaluate,

CT2 server overloaded cant play at all severe lag issues locking, stuttering and jumping

CT1 NO! ranked battles what so ever



Steel_Warrior63 #19 Posted May 06 2017 - 19:13

    Private

  • -Players-
  • 2675 battles
  • 9
  • Member since:
    11-17-2015
how can we evaluate ranked battles from North America if we cant get in or even play and not get blown out if we do get in and the lag is so severe that we cant even play I was teleported 3/4 of the way a crossed the map right into 8 tanks shooting me down like a dog.

Unknown0ne #20 Posted May 06 2017 - 21:42

    Captain

  • WGLNA Gold League Player
  • 27362 battles
  • 1,081
  • [BULBA] BULBA
  • Member since:
    07-28-2010

View PostVortex747, on May 06 2017 - 07:40, said:

I really don't understand the arguments you guys are presenting here. If there is no incentive to invest time in this game mode, no one will play it. This mode only has value if a significant part of the top tier player base is interested. I think the 12/3 ratio on payouts is correct. It removes the drowners and the 0 damage muppets but the rest of the team benefits from a win, so winning becomes more important than individual stats. If you carry a losing team, you still get the benefit of your effort. In terms of the rewards, a 5% DPM increase is not a make or break difference but it's not nothing. It will make competitive players put time and effort into this game mode, the people who don't care today will still not care.

 

The argument is there's plenty of other things WG can use as rewards that don't give a small subset of players a notable advantage that no one asked for and few (if any) people actually want. For campaigns, WG gives out, generally average or worse, unique premium tanks for clan wars events and that works pretty well in increasing clan activity in my experience. It stands to reason the same would apply here.

 

Or they could just keep the bonds system, but instead of having improved equipment and directives, make a bonds only shop with things like special premium tanks that aren't normally available in the game (Skorp, 252u, Lorraine 40 t, etc...), gold, credits, etc... Or, even better, they could just add a credit and XP bonus to the mode; players would flock to a mode where tier Xs could make as much as a tier 8 premium with a good game, instead of just being a credit sink unless you're a very good player.

 

Furthermore, a 5% DPM increase is still a 5% DPM increase, it's a 5% advantage conferred on the best players in the server, who will be best able to use that advantage to the greatest effect. That 5% DPM increase is compounded by whom will get access to it. Though the percentage is not important; it could be a 0.0001% DPM increase, the point remains it is yet another non-skill-based advantage that is completely unnecessary. Arguably made worse in that it's availability is highly limited to the top players on the server. At least all of the other non-skill-based advantages can be gotten with time (and/or money).

 

Also, if WG really wants people to play the mode a nice carrot would be much better than the stick approach they are taking, since--as you mention--these rewards make (in theory, on NA the game mode may just die due to a lack of players) competitive players put time into this mode. Instead of just giving players who want to play in the mode a nice prize if they do well (a nice carrot), competitive players are effectively forced to grind bonds in this new game mode to stay competitive (the stick). Nevermind the players who want to get into the competitive scene but haven't finished grinding all the other stuff they need (tanks & crews mainly), and now they have yet another thing they'll need to grind to reach an equal level, which will only further kill the influx of new players into the high level competitive scene.

 

Basically, improved equipment and directives have no benefit (to the game) beyond being a reward for ranked battles, while being detrimental to the game balance and making it even harder for newer players to get into the high level competitive scene. Further, improved equipment and directives are completely unnecessary; there are plenty of other ways to incentivise players to play the game mode. Gold, credits, unique/rare premium tanks, boosters, camouflages, etc... or even just making it a profitable mode to play.






1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users