Jump to content

Recommended Posts

So i thought of a stupid way to fix ranked battles. 

Every tank should get an exp modifier based on the tank's strengh, kinda like the with the wn8. So for example arty gets a 0,8 exp multiplier, chieftan/279 get a 0,6, whereas shit tanks like the RHM get a 2,2 ect. Ofc these are just some random numbers.

With this system people could maybe try bringing non meta tanks and there could be a bigger variety of tanks and therefore games could be less cancerous.

On the other hand it could backfire as people would a) just use tanks with a good strengh/exp ratio 

Or b) just use strong vehicles regadless as it is not worth it 

C) ?????

What do you guys think? Would it make it more interesting and/or better or it would simply be worse?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Suspect it would just lead to silly battles with 10 rhm per side (or whichever tanks got the best modifier).

For mine fixing ranked was about the overall balance in tier 10 more than anything. If there were fewer broken tanks there would be fewer broken battles. The premise of any competitive mode should be player ability as the primary input, not what tank they bring.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, nabucodonsor said:

So i thought of a stupid way to fix ranked battles. 

Every tank should get an exp modifier based on the tank's strengh, kinda like the with the wn8. So for example arty gets a 0,8 exp multiplier, chieftan/279 get a 0,6, whereas shit tanks like the RHM get a 2,2 ect. Ofc these are just some random numbers.

With this system people could maybe try bringing non meta tanks and there could be a bigger variety of tanks and therefore games could be less cancerous.

On the other hand it could backfire as people would a) just use tanks with a good strengh/exp ratio 

Or b) just use strong vehicles regadless as it is not worth it 

C) ?????

What do you guys think? Would it make it more interesting and/or better or it would simply be worse?

Very abusable. People would just run tanks that are shit but good at farming, e.g. 268 (not really good but passable at what it does)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd probably cull the player pool to be 7v7 like team clash a few months ago so it would at least be an interesting alterantive to randos. No arty so I can enjoy my game but they should do that in randos too :serb:. Also I agree with @Ezz that you're better off balancing tier 10 in general.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Make bonus battles repeatable so I don't have to care about my tide pod victim teams getting steam rolled of the rip. Getting 1 chevron for doing everything you physically can, or get 1st in xp taken away by the skilled clicker that was farming assist on all of my targets makes me want to throw up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

never thought id say this

but i agree with quickybaby that one of the first things ranked needs is to not allow reward tanks to participate 

and this is coming from someone who spams both chief/279 in the game mode 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Deus__Ex__Machina said:

never thought id say this

but i agree with quickybaby that one of the first things ranked needs is to not allow reward tanks to participate 

and this is coming from someone who spams both chief/279 in the game mode 

But my T95E6 ;-; 
Let me have this one thing 
Please dont make me buy back the stb purely for ranked.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, Deus__Ex__Machina said:

never thought id say this

but i agree with quickybaby that one of the first things ranked needs is to not allow reward tanks to participate 

and this is coming from someone who spams both chief/279 in the game mode 

it wouldn't be a problem if they were all balanced properly. Or if the rest of the damn tier was balanced properly.

the ultimate fix is still to do the obvious, and fix the major imbalance of vehicles at tier 10. we have effective tier 9s and effective tier 11s all in tier 10 ffs. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tbh i get it that they should balance tier x first and/or remove reward tanks but i mean this is WG we are talking about. We all know they cant and will not fix anything.

So imo they should just spice things a little

On 4/10/2020 at 1:24 PM, lavawing said:

Very abusable. People would just run tanks that are shit but good at farming, e.g. 268 (not really good but passable at what it does)

True but I'd like to see how that would turn out.

Sure many would be able to abuse the system but I believe that my idea its still better than spamming  the same 2 OP tanks. Also I am pretty sure that some dude would come up some wacky strategy that only  he/she could work.

It would at least make things interesting.

 

Also WG could simply change the exp coefficients from one season to another

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah I think removing reward tanks (and artillery) from the game mode is a healthy start to first and foremost fix the issue of HE spam. 

Artillery is an easier class, even WG has admitted this themselves that it's easier to play so it has no place in a competitive gamemode - or should get reduced points and a MUCH slower climb. 1 point for participating and 2 for top 5, 4 for top 3 on the winning team for example. 

The problem is almost entirely 279 and Chieftains anyway and not really any tech tree stuff. SConq and 430U would probably be the spamtanks of the masses again but at least you can pixelsnipe its turrets with damaging rounds (the favourite gameplay type of the mongoloid russian server anyway) when hulldown and easily fight them when they're not which makes the game playable. STB-1 likely the tryhard tank pick of good players but this would open up many more viable picks into the game mode at least that isn't trolling. 268v4 the donkey tank for shitters wanting to be relevant. Tanks like 60TP, TVP, 50B, Prog65, Strv, 140, M48, IS-7 (would be super strong imo), Leo1, 5A, 277, Grille and the spicy Badger pickTM (it works I promise), along with more I probably forgot - much more diversity without having the undeniably strongest 2-3 tank picks being the only thing played. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

While tanks are a problem, at least my experience with the game mode this season was the absolutely terrible meta it fostered on the NA server. At the lower ranks, it meant insane one sided zergs with 10-13 tanks all going one way with nobody wanting to scout or hold the other flank; meanwhile that Zerg sometimes came to an end when running into the enemy team’s zerg because nobody wanted to take the first hit. So the game devolved into either — one side has vastly more tanks and just runs over the other; or the number of tanks are closer, nobody wants to take a hit, both teams sit there and get bled by arty and HE spam.

I don’t think the tank fixes are necessarily going to fix that problem, unfortunately. The problem is the reward structure, and I don’t have a good way to fix that. If you prioritize winning then even solid performances on the losing team will be penalized; whereas if you prioritize individual performance then nobody will do game winning moves for fear of losing advancement (which is honestly even now the case)

I do think role XP was a decent idea, but I am not entirely convinced that every rank has a balanced role. I got frustrated and for division 1 mostly ran arty (campy games meant arty was extra strong) and feel like arty’s role XP is unduly exaggerated. 

I suppose I have more problems than solutions, but maybe that implies that Ranked is an inherently flawed game mode...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think removing the impossibly strong tanks makes the game fluent again as there is no ability to be 100% invulnerable anymore so the game will not stop at chokepoints indefinitely and rely on arty. The IS-7 and E3 are the only tanks that can do that and they don't have anywhere near the same advantages in other situations, E3 is too slow to be reliable when you are picking into a unknown map and the IS-7 is much worse at actually dealing damage and have much less hulldown conditions as its upper plate is pennable from any angle making the ability to be invulnerable much, much harder. IS-7 will probably be a more common pick though and you might actually see superheavies back into rotation if the game is still slow after removing rewards. It will probably still be a problem on some maps but it unlocks much more on the rest. Maybe it's bandaiding the actual core issue but it still is a very easy bandaid that really improves the gamemode for basically every player without a 279 or Chieftain and makes them actually relevant again. There are problems that will make the game mode inherently frustrating still but I think the biggest issue is all of the players who don't play CW and aren't finished with the campaign missions as they are just forced to play inferior tanks if they want to touch the game mode at all and that is one you can fix very easily. 

Having played ranked and it's ebola, would ANY player be upset about not being able to play rewards if nobody else could pick it either? I doubt it. Quickybaby is the god of tanks (fuck the haters :QBFlip:) and he is very much right. 

A Ranked mode should value balance and viability as it's the foundation for any sort of real competition. WG have been clear that randoms is not that, but this is a ranked game mode that needs to have that. If it doesn't it is not a ranked game mode. It's a grinding mode with a reward progression. You can't call it ranked if you aren't basing it on balance and actually structure it around skill. When bad players can get to max rank with NEGATIVE winrates the game mode is entirely pointless in deducting who is playing well and who is not. That means the unbalanced tanks are a no-go. Unbalanced maps (by winrate) are a no go too. They already pinched the map pool a bit but they did the wrong maps. It also means that bad players don't progress. 

The point system needs a revamp again, and you can't have security or any type of floor near the starting point. You need to start above it and be able to go downward as well if you are playing poorly. Just steal the LP system and ELO of League and call it ranked points instead of league points and you'd be fine. 

10 game set to somewhat estimate your skill level, placing you higher/lower depending on how you perform both on wins/losses and your combined output. (Use WTR per game, it's pretty accurate actually even if you're having a losing streak or winning streak)

That places you somewhere on the ranked ladder and it will actually fairly rank you against players of your skill level eventually. You run into the map issue of better players playing a slower game and the game turns into massive camps or blitzes which maps generally aren't designed for. I think you can solve that by pinching the map pool further as you go up divisions. (I don't know what maps were in as I didn't play the last few seasons but maps like El Halluf and Prokh which are great maps don't work very well without bad player fodder and need to go away when the majority of the team is 60% players or better)

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just a small note, I own 279 and it's kinda poor for Ranked battles.

I really dislike the top speed of a sluggish ~35 km/h and its hull armor against premium and often regular rounds.

Ranked meta requires tanks with max speed of at least 45 km/h, so anything slower than 277/5a is bad. Fatton speed is kinda low as well.

I did most of the hardest games in the last division with Progetto 65, this tank is awesome and most importantly, if you feel like you're about to lose the game, 4 shells can make a difference i.e. kill or deal dmg that is highly required to not lose the rank.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, kolni said:

STB-1 likely the tryhard tank pick of good players

woah woah woah are you saying what I think you're saying? STB-1 is a viable tank now?

say it aint so

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Player my first battle in the stb in a few years in this season of ranked. 4 chevrons later, rather enjoyed it. It's reload feels silly fast.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Assassin7 said:

woah woah woah are you saying what I think you're saying? STB-1 is a viable tank now?

say it aint so

best tech tree 10 atm

type 61 is up there among nines too tbh, dpm is fucked you outreload all 390 alpha meds by enough to win trades 2:1 all the time and it handles as well as it did (which was pretty good last time i played it, enjoyed the tank in general already) and you can just trade your way into good games on that tank with just a little bit of farming which is pretty funny

saw stanlock play type61 at 4,7k xd

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, kolni said:

best tech tree 10 atm

type 61 is up there among nines too tbh, dpm is fucked you outreload all 390 alpha meds by enough to win trades 2:1 all the time and it handles as well as it did (which was pretty good last time i played it, enjoyed the tank in general already) and you can just trade your way into good games on that tank with just a little bit of farming which is pretty funny

saw stanlock play type61 at 4,7k xd

Bruhhhhhh

 

and all those naysayers denying the gloriousness of the STBae-1 for ALL THESE YEARS.

 

maybe I Should log in and play a proper session in it again

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, kolni said:

Prog65

Fuck me, I'm triggered already.

 

ASIA server ranked is full of camping progettos that lose games and never drop chevrons. Fucking hell. Its really easy to not drop chevrons in one when you snipe until you're the last one alive and then dump a clip, which is what almost every game ends in over here. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Arbitrary multipliers would make it an even bigger mess since WG would screw those up and bobject would get the same weight as an RHM. Overall Lights would get screwed, meds too since WG thinks heavies are bad. 

 

The only way to fix ranked is to drop it to t9 or t7 since they are more balanced than t8 or 10

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, hazzgar said:

Arbitrary multipliers would make it an even bigger mess since WG would screw those up and bobject would get the same weight as an RHM. Overall Lights would get screwed, meds too since WG thinks heavies are bad. 

 

The only way to fix ranked is to drop it to t9 or t7 since they are more balanced than t8 or 10

God no they would fuck up those tier too.

The reason why tier 8 and 10 are horrible is because tier 8 is for grinding credits and 10 because its the final level its where people want to get ect

And therefore WG has to make it so there is ubalance so people can throw money gold or whatever to have a certain tank

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe if ranked battles was actually skill based not just a shitty grind through 20 games then 45 ranks

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, nabucodonsor said:

God no they would fuck up those tier too.

The reason why tier 8 and 10 are horrible is because tier 8 is for grinding credits and 10 because its the final level its where people want to get ect

And therefore WG has to make it so there is ubalance so people can throw money gold or whatever to have a certain tank

 

Yes but doing ranked at t7 or 9 wouldn't change those triers alone. T10 is still there to be the end game content people grind for. If ranked was T7 or T9 people would still grind for flavor of the month t10. 

 

Also WG doesn't create unbalance. It's not a systematic plan. They simply create tanks that have marketable gimmicks. So it's either tanks with cool new features (STRV, 2 gun ruskies, Autoreloaders, Shitbarn ) or tanks that are OP or look OP (First 430U, second was the Foch B since when it was new everyone wanted it)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, hazzgar said:

Yes but doing ranked at t7 or 9 wouldn't change those triers alone. T10 is still there to be the end game content people grind for. If ranked was T7 or T9 people would still grind for flavor of the month t10. 

 

Also WG doesn't create unbalance. It's not a systematic plan. They simply create tanks that have marketable gimmicks. So it's either tanks with cool new features (STRV, 2 gun ruskies, Autoreloaders, Shitbarn ) or tanks that are OP or look OP (First 430U, second was the Foch B since when it was new everyone wanted it)

True unfortunatelly being OP is a market gimmick and therefore they do plan a way to unbalance a certain tier (or more probably they dont give a fuck about balancing).

You can make tanks with gimmiks that are not OP or not broken. For example the JPE100 is a broken piece of trash that is bad from a perfomance and gameplay point of view whereas the JT isnt as the tier 9 has a role and does not have the ungodly alpha the tier 10 has. They both are gimmicky but one is broken while the other one isnt.

Every single tier 9 can somehow be playable or decent while we all know that most tier Xs are completely useless in the current meta when compared to the top meta tech tree tanks (ex e5 vs SConq) let alone when compared with the reward vehicles.

WG has managed to make two tiers completely different from a balancing point of view. This means that if they want to they can make a meta that is not as toxic as the current tier x is.

But this also means that they have made decisions to make a tier completely broken or have made little to no effort to fix it.

In conclusion WG knows what they are doing in regards to what breaks the game. They simply give zero Fs because they know people will invest money/time in chasing certain tanks ect regardless

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/11/2020 at 1:31 PM, sr360 said:

I do think role XP was a decent idea, but I am not entirely convinced that every rank has a balanced role. I got frustrated and for division 1 mostly ran arty (campy games meant arty was extra strong) and feel like arty’s role XP is unduly exaggerated. 

One e of the problems with Role XP is how little extra XP you get for playing to Wargaming's define "role" for your tank.  Blocking 2K damage in a tier 10 super heavy and blocking 8K damage in a tier 10 super heavy makes a minimal difference in role XP.  Sitting back and farming 7K damage in a STRV and doing most of your damage form beyond 300 meters while remaining unspotted on a loss still results in less overall XP than an arty player who tracks and stuns a few tanks or an EBR player who YOLOs and spots 12 of the enemy team while doing minimal damage and spotting damage.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...