Jump to content


With RANKED BATTLES...why play Standard?


  • Please log in to reply
20 replies to this topic

Zulu__Dawn #1 Posted May 08 2017 - 23:05

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 31330 battles
  • 576
  • [-_-] -_-
  • Member since:
    10-29-2011

1st ISSUE

Has anyone bothered to ask this question?  With RANKED BATTLES...why play Standard?

 

If Ranked Battles is being offered and you can progress up the ranks by spamming games AND you get rewarded with "extra" goodies then why ever go back to Standard battles???

 

I just watched QuickyBaby's video and the "Ranked Battles" season only lasts a month...so during this month why would anyone ever want to play in a standard battle and waste the precious time NOT playing in a "ranked battle"?  If I can do my Daily Doubles in ranked play, other than "special missions" it just seems like the Standard Battles server is going to have a ton of folks pulled away from it in order for people to do a ton of ranked battles...

 

Why not just have "Standard battles" and start ranking people according to the process...why create a whole other game mode operating on a separate server???

 

2nd ISSUE

I already posted earlier about SPAMMING BATTLES...in the "Ranked Battles Feedback Thread" it was like post number 3-4...and for me...QuickyBaby has confirmed my suspicions. Spamming battles or let's call it "ACTIVITY" is going to have a HUGE impact...QuickyBaby says "a very skilled active player can earn about 30k bonds in season".  Very skilled "ACTIVE" player...emphasis on active...

 

So guys who don't play at all during the week or very little...every single night for 3-4 hours...like competitive Clan Wars used to be...will be left behind in the dust.  A person like myself who is a casual weekend warrior that plays 3-4 hours Saturday/Sunday morning will get left way back in the pack.  So this is setup for the mouth breathers who don't do anything but sit at a computer all day long...or the E-sports guy in their unwashed shirts who play all day long and call it "training".

 

This last part is why for sure Wargaming cannot allow the use of this special BONDS crap and or this special equipment into the normal game...it will ruin it!!!

 

 

Zulu



Dalamar #2 Posted May 08 2017 - 23:09

    Private

  • Players
  • 22784 battles
  • 2
  • Member since:
    11-01-2011
Isn't ranked battles tier 10 only?

Rhadamanthuz #3 Posted May 08 2017 - 23:13

    Sergeant

  • Players
  • 31180 battles
  • 240
  • [P2WIN] P2WIN
  • Member since:
    08-09-2012

Block Quote

"Wargaming cannot allow the use of this special BONDS crap and or this special equipment into the normal game...it will ruin it!!!"

 

+1



Cig753 #4 Posted May 08 2017 - 23:24

    Sergeant

  • Players
  • 24246 battles
  • 213
  • Member since:
    06-15-2013

its only 5% depending on the equipment and thats only if you run the special food every battle (which most people will save for cw/sh/whatever) otherwise its just 2.5%

 

not game breaking at all



simba90 #5 Posted May 08 2017 - 23:26

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 11710 battles
  • 549
  • [FIFO] FIFO
  • Member since:
    06-03-2012

 

 

 

Point #1

Ranked is just T10, you will still need to grind the sub T10 tanks in randoms as well and grinding credits and crew xp in your premium doubles to pimp those T10 crews up.

Only a few players will be able to solely battle in ranked battles. Remember that it is skill based MM to a degree so winning ~65% of your battles will be hard because you get matched against people of your rank.


 

Point #2

A good player who wins more than loses can still achieve a higher rank in 10 battles than a  mouthbreather can in 50, because every time the mouthbreather ranks up they will put up against more skilled players.

So while activity is a key component if you are good enough you will still be able to get ranks with just playing.


 



Aquatic_Poi #6 Posted May 08 2017 - 23:32

    Staff sergeant

  • WGLNA Bronze League Player
  • 27602 battles
  • 435
  • [FD_UP] FD_UP
  • Member since:
    06-07-2012
Sometimes you want to be able to just derp around and not worry about progress. Right now with wn8 being the general judge of a player's ability pubs are essentially ranked battles already. I think it'll be nice to have a new gamemode where I can play super cereal, with other players in the same mindset.

DarkConfidant #7 Posted May 08 2017 - 23:35

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 21064 battles
  • 641
  • Member since:
    03-14-2013
It will be nice to finally have a competitive mode (no other game uses causal stats to determine player skill) to figure out how good you are at this game rather than how good are you pounding the snot out of people at tier 3 with your 4 skill crew and equipment against people who started playing this month. The amount of people with 2k+ wn8 and sub 40% win rates on tier 10s is disgusting. 

Edited by DarkConfidant, May 08 2017 - 23:35.


Heldar #8 Posted May 08 2017 - 23:37

    Major

  • WGLNA Bronze League Player
  • 27628 battles
  • 2,873
  • [REL2] REL2
  • Member since:
    03-06-2012

Ranked battles - you lose metric [edited]loads of credits.

 

Strongholds - you make metric [edited]loads of credits.



SkimpyLawnChair #9 Posted May 08 2017 - 23:44

    Major

  • Players
  • 21117 battles
  • 2,856
  • [-KEK-] -KEK-
  • Member since:
    07-08-2013

Biggest issue in this is you mentioned something quickybaby said.

 

Why would you talk about a being thats irrelevant in all gaming, nevermind the most irrelevant game on the planet?



DarkConfidant #10 Posted May 08 2017 - 23:50

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 21064 battles
  • 641
  • Member since:
    03-14-2013

View PostSkimpyLawnChair, on May 08 2017 - 22:44, said:

Biggest issue in this is you mentioned something quickybaby said.

 

Why would you talk about a being thats irrelevant in all gaming, nevermind the most irrelevant game on the planet?

 

Someone is jealous, lol. 

Hellsfog #11 Posted May 08 2017 - 23:51

    Major

  • Players
  • 29925 battles
  • 3,592
  • [REL2] REL2
  • Member since:
    06-22-2011
The better question is why play frontline mode, if there are ranked battles. 

simba90 #12 Posted May 08 2017 - 23:55

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 11710 battles
  • 549
  • [FIFO] FIFO
  • Member since:
    06-03-2012

View PostHeldar, on May 08 2017 - 23:37, said:

Ranked battles - you lose metric [edited]loads of credits.

 

Strongholds - you make metric [edited]loads of credits.

 

I wouldn't say you lose more credits in Ranked than you do solo'g T10 in randoms.

In fact you probably stand to earn more because there will be more damage to go round with every match full of T10.



Unknown0ne #13 Posted May 09 2017 - 05:01

    Captain

  • WGLNA Gold League Player
  • 27258 battles
  • 1,055
  • [BULBA] BULBA
  • Member since:
    07-28-2010

View PostZulu__Dawn, on May 08 2017 - 17:05, said:

1st ISSUE

Has anyone bothered to ask this question?  With RANKED BATTLES...why play Standard?

 

If Ranked Battles is being offered and you can progress up the ranks by spamming games AND you get rewarded with "extra" goodies then why ever go back to Standard battles???

 

I just watched QuickyBaby's video and the "Ranked Battles" season only lasts a month...so during this month why would anyone ever want to play in a standard battle and waste the precious time NOT playing in a "ranked battle"?  If I can do my Daily Doubles in ranked play, other than "special missions" it just seems like the Standard Battles server is going to have a ton of folks pulled away from it in order for people to do a ton of ranked battles...

 

Why not just have "Standard battles" and start ranking people according to the process...why create a whole other game mode operating on a separate server???

 

2nd ISSUE

I already posted earlier about SPAMMING BATTLES...in the "Ranked Battles Feedback Thread" it was like post number 3-4...and for me...QuickyBaby has confirmed my suspicions. Spamming battles or let's call it "ACTIVITY" is going to have a HUGE impact...QuickyBaby says "a very skilled active player can earn about 30k bonds in season".  Very skilled "ACTIVE" player...emphasis on active...

 

Zulu

 

Perhaps your emphasis should be on very skilled. An average player at 49% WR is going to crawl up the ranks, if they make any progress at all, losing a chevron (in theory) around every other battle. The top 12 players on the winning team and top 3 on the losing team gain a chevron, while the bottom 12 on the losing team lose a chevron. Most of the time, an average player isn't going to fall in the top 3 on the losing team, thus most losses they are going to lose a chevron while most wins they are going to gain a chevron (bottom 3 on the winning team don't gain or lose a chevron).

 

Given this, why would the majority of players play in this mode? It's just going to a massive credit sink to the average player, with no real rewards, from what I can tell.



MountainGoatNoName #14 Posted May 09 2017 - 21:04

    Staff sergeant

  • -Players-
  • 7384 battles
  • 412
  • [ATKRE] ATKRE
  • Member since:
    03-10-2017

View PostUnknown0ne, on May 09 2017 - 05:01, said:

 

Perhaps your emphasis should be on very skilled. An average player at 49% WR is going to crawl up the ranks, if they make any progress at all, losing a chevron (in theory) around every other battle. The top 12 players on the winning team and top 3 on the losing team gain a chevron, while the bottom 12 on the losing team lose a chevron. Most of the time, an average player isn't going to fall in the top 3 on the losing team, thus most losses they are going to lose a chevron while most wins they are going to gain a chevron (bottom 3 on the winning team don't gain or lose a chevron).

 

Given this, why would the majority of players play in this mode? It's just going to a massive credit sink to the average player, with no real rewards, from what I can tell.

 

Once you got a rank above the first level, the wg will reward you 500 gold and a bunch of other stuff. Basically, 500 free gold for everyone each week.  

 

And almost free gold consumables for good players. Because you can get 30 consumables for each new rank on average.  The only thing burnt my credits is gold ammo.

If I was running batchat, I can even make credits with premium account. Because batchat dosen't require much gold ammo. And batchat is a good tank to climb up leader board.


Edited by MountainGoatNoName, May 09 2017 - 21:41.


MountainGoatNoName #15 Posted May 09 2017 - 21:19

    Staff sergeant

  • -Players-
  • 7384 battles
  • 412
  • [ATKRE] ATKRE
  • Member since:
    03-10-2017

 

1st issue.

It's all about individual competition. No platoon. Tier X only. It's a competitive mode. 

 

2nd 

What QB said is not the fact. The top one player can get 7750 bonds each season. That is the maximum number of how much one player can get each season at the time I am typing now.I have seen so many 49% players got to rank 5 on test server, which means 500 bonds each week. 

And I bet blue players can get around 5000 bonds each season within 500 battles.I got to first league in the first stage within 100 battles while I had to bear 300+ ping. I am top 200 now within 200 battles.(I'm a purple btw)

 

3rd

Why would I want to compete against those players spent much more time on this game since you clearly know that I am a casual player?

Why would I care about being left behind since the random battle mode is unfair inherently?


Edited by MountainGoatNoName, May 09 2017 - 21:59.


I_DIE_ALOT_2 #16 Posted May 14 2017 - 05:40

    Corporal

  • -Players-
  • 14361 battles
  • 30
  • [ARKH] ARKH
  • Member since:
    07-03-2014

View PostMountainGoatNoName, on May 09 2017 - 21:19, said:

 

1st issue.

It's all about individual competition. No platoon. Tier X only. It's a competitive mode. 

 

2nd 

What QB said is not the fact. The top one player can get 7750 bonds each season. That is the maximum number of how much one player can get each season at the time I am typing now.I have seen so many 49% players got to rank 5 on test server, which means 500 bonds each week. 

And I bet blue players can get around 5000 bonds each season within 500 battles.I got to first league in the first stage within 100 battles while I had to bear 300+ ping. I am top 200 now within 200 battles.(I'm a purple btw)

 

3rd

Why would I want to compete against those players spent much more time on this game since you clearly know that I am a casual player?

Why would I care about being left behind since the random battle mode is unfair inherently?

 

if there are 49%  players making it to rank 5 then they need to make it progressively harder to rank up that is the whole point that you cant just play lots of games poorly and move up 

MountainGoatNoName #17 Posted May 16 2017 - 04:24

    Staff sergeant

  • -Players-
  • 7384 battles
  • 412
  • [ATKRE] ATKRE
  • Member since:
    03-10-2017

View PostI_DIE_ALOT_2, on May 14 2017 - 05:40, said:

 

if there are 49%  players making it to rank 5 then they need to make it progressively harder to rank up that is the whole point that you cant just play lots of games poorly and move up  

 

 

 It's overall win rate of their record. I don't know their recent stats. But it means rank5 is not impossible for most players. Just a matter of time based on your skill level. Only people like potato cannot make it 

 

 


KingofDragons #18 Posted May 26 2017 - 18:52

    Sergeant

  • -Players-
  • 15240 battles
  • 166
  • Member since:
    05-14-2011

i still can not believe how people still think that an overall ( average) winning % rating applies to every tank a person owns .. So let me explain.. i own 4 Tier 10s .. Leopard 1 ( 36% )  JagDpanzer E100 (45%)  T110E5 (55%)  Type 5 Heavy (53%) ... When you face my T110E5 (55%)  but XVM shows i'm a 47% it will give you a false rating.. I do a better job of affecting the outcome of battles with this Tank ..

 

XVM fails to show this and this is why i believe XVM should show your current stat with that individual Vehicle and not an average .. When i will play Ranked battles on regular server i will not be using my Leopard and JagD..

 

As for Ranked battles itself it will turn out to be a money sink for using gold ammo because you can not afford to not do damage and to waste shots using ammo that will bounce ... Currently i'm always in the hole -35k to -45k especially with Type 5 at 6400 $ per shot.. You will find that all these low shot rated cannons will be spraying gold .. 

 

The other thing i've noticed with Ranked Battles is how much more aggressive players have become because being on the winning team does not guarantee a Chevron and also the fact that you need to be in Top 3 if you lose..

 

I have realized and am fine with the fact that , on the average , playing this Tier will cost me.. 



RNG_is_Magic #19 Posted May 28 2017 - 07:53

    Sergeant

  • -Players-
  • 9373 battles
  • 153
  • [CRTL2] CRTL2
  • Member since:
    01-10-2015

View PostKingofDragons, on May 26 2017 - 11:52, said:

i still can not believe how people still think that an overall ( average) winning % rating applies to every tank a person owns .. So let me explain.. i own 4 Tier 10s .. Leopard 1 ( 36% )  JagDpanzer E100 (45%)  T110E5 (55%)  Type 5 Heavy (53%) ... When you face my T110E5 (55%)  but XVM shows i'm a 47% it will give you a false rating.. I do a better job of affecting the outcome of battles with this Tank ..

 

XVM fails to show this and this is why i believe XVM should show your current stat with that individual Vehicle and not an average .. When i will play Ranked battles on regular server i will not be using my Leopard and JagD..

 

As for Ranked battles itself it will turn out to be a money sink for using gold ammo because you can not afford to not do damage and to waste shots using ammo that will bounce ... Currently i'm always in the hole -35k to -45k especially with Type 5 at 6400 $ per shot.. You will find that all these low shot rated cannons will be spraying gold .. 

 

The other thing i've noticed with Ranked Battles is how much more aggressive players have become because being on the winning team does not guarantee a Chevron and also the fact that you need to be in Top 3 if you lose..

 

I have realized and am fine with the fact that , on the average , playing this Tier will cost me.. 

 

Win rate is not the be all end all stat.  You have a 55% win rate with your T101E5 and average 1200 dmg per battle.  I have a 50% win rate and average 2000 dmg per battle which isn't that good.  So explain how your doing a better job of affecting the outcome of a battle.

Unknown0ne #20 Posted May 28 2017 - 15:06

    Captain

  • WGLNA Gold League Player
  • 27258 battles
  • 1,055
  • [BULBA] BULBA
  • Member since:
    07-28-2010

View PostRNG_is_Magic, on May 28 2017 - 01:53, said:

 

Win rate is not the be all end all stat.  You have a 55% win rate with your T101E5 and average 1200 dmg per battle.  I have a 50% win rate and average 2000 dmg per battle which isn't that good.  So explain how your doing a better job of affecting the outcome of a battle.

 

To give you another example, I have a 44% win rate in my M60 and a 58% win rate in my M48 Patton, but my average damage is basically the same in both, and my average kills and WN8 are both notable higher in the M60. Keeping in mind these are basically identical tanks, and if anything I played the battles in the M60 when I was a better player than when I played the M48's battles, how does this make sense?

 

I think there is a lot factors:

 

First, there's sample size; even 100 battles isn't a significant amount, external factors like RNG and bad teams can play a major factor. This is why account wide stats are more desirable than per a tank stats, since most people don't have 1000's of battles in the tank they're currently playing.

 

Second, the game has changed by a truly massive amount; matchmaker fundamentally changed, tech trees have been moved around, tanks added/removed/rebalanced, maps changed, physics introduced, gold rounds and consumables made available for credits. All of this has an impact, even when a vehicle isn't outright changed, the changes made to the game can have a significant impact on that vehicle.

 

Third, the player base has changed. The number of high tier tanks has grown significantly and the average player skill level has likely increased as the influx of new players slows.

 

Fourth, there's platooning. Platooning is what makes win rate largely a vague metric, rather than a precise one. A platoon of 3 even decent players coordinating can have a massive impact on those player's win rates. A platoon of 3 exceptional players can create ridiculously high win rates.

 

Fifth, stats never tell the whole story. When, and to whom, one does damage to in a battle is far more important than the actual number. It's easy to have decent damage stats by camping in the back and letting your teammates die while you farm damage, though that doesn't tend to produce wins.

 

 

Point being, how good one's stats are in a tank is far from the only factor, and even as a factor stats don't indicate the effectiveness of one's contribution. In general, overall stats are more and more worthless as time goes on and changes continue to occur. Recent stats that reflect one's current performance in the current state of the game are far more indicative of a player's skill, but even still recent stats have many flaws.






1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users