Jump to content
You need to play a total of 10 battles to post in this section.
SlamUez

The rigging of top loser by clans in Ranked

23 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

Beta Tester
906 posts

I was in a game where the battle was tight. There were members of the same clan playing on both teams.

Towards the end or even through out the match I never saw the ships of the same clan shooting each other and at the end 2 ships rammed each other on the same clan.

I have screenshot, replay and ending screen to prove this. I feel this is not fair and should be named - shamed. These are top bracket ranked games, I felt the DD did a tonne to deserve not losing a star. But clans rigging it is starting to turn this into a joke.

Is this acceptable and should this be reported to WG?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
154 posts
4,084 battles
Just now, SlamUez said:

I was in a game where the battle was tight. There were members of the same clan playing on both teams.

Towards the end or even through out the match I never saw the ships of the same clan shooting each other and at the end 2 ships rammed each other on the same clan.

I have screenshot, replay and ending screen to prove this. I feel this is not fair and should be named - shamed. These are top bracket ranked games, I felt the DD did a tonne to deserve not losing a star. But clans rigging it is starting to turn this into a joke.

Is this acceptable and should this be reported to WG?

Yes, if there is any evidence of collusion it should be reported to WG. Shaming them on the forum won't do much but if you have screenshots and a replay that shows this type of behaviour send a ticket.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[MEGA]
Member
4,562 posts
17,552 battles
3 hours ago, SlamUez said:

Towards the end or even through out the match I never saw the ships of the same clan shooting each other and at the end 2 ships rammed each other on the same clan

it's not mine is it?

Edited by drakon233

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
142 posts
2,615 battles
2 minutes ago, keskparane said:

We were just having a chat in battle. Most of the people chatting thought the save a star should be removed. I think so too.

Pretty much this.

The save a star function incentivizes players to adopt the "Every man for himself" approach and changes the dynamic of the round completely.

You turn a game mode where team play and communication is crucial to winning, into a game mode where it's literally the Survivor island - especially if the team goes down one ship early in the round.

So after the team experiences an early setback, and it becomes doubly more important to keep everyone co-ordinated, WoWS instead says, "Welp! your chances of wining just reduced here, ditch your team and nurse your star".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
1,386 posts
8,224 battles
33 minutes ago, Darkshaunz said:

Pretty much this.

The save a star function incentivizes players to adopt the "Every man for himself" approach and changes the dynamic of the round completely.

You turn a game mode where team play and communication is crucial to winning, into a game mode where it's literally the Survivor island - especially if the team goes down one ship early in the round.

So after the team experiences an early setback, and it becomes doubly more important to keep everyone co-ordinated, WoWS instead says, "Welp! your chances of wining just reduced here, ditch your team and nurse your star".

IIRC, the earliest season had no "save star" mechanism. And that season no one in SEA and only a selected minimal few in other servers actually reached rank one. The save star mechanism is there to greatly ease the process.

Without saving star, the stars in the pool only gets generated by "irrevocable" ranks, and the nearest safe rank is 12. And whoever quit ranked halfway will take enourmous amount of stars away from ranked, which resulted in the total amount in the pool gets reduced day by day. However with saving stars, each ranked game adds one star to the pool.

The save star system is not wrong, the battle/economy contribution match is. Star should be saved for the guy doing the greatest contribution, and if that is not the case, then the EXP does not reflect the contribution clearly and precisely.

Edited by HMS_Swiftsure_08

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
1,105 posts

i have made a calculation :

Rank 23~15 : basically you can reach rank 15 EVEN WITHOUT DOING DAMAGE!

Rank 15~12 : you are guarantee to get rank 12..... just keep spam playing button

Rank 12~10 : need a little effort, but free 1 star at reach rank 11 and 10 is really usefull

 

Rank 10~1 : here is the bloody start, if you have 50% WR YOU JUST NEED TO LOSING 40x with TOP XP EARNER! 

 

it mean, the moment you get 70x top XP earner in losing team..... YOU ARE GUARANTEE to get rank 1! do you think people with less than 30% WR exist?

its the easiest way TO REACH RANK 1!

 

if killing team mates is not forbidden, i will massacre my own team.... when they are gone, i will farm top XP earner easily......

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
1,386 posts
8,224 battles
12 minutes ago, Skarhabek said:

i have made a calculation :

Rank 23~15 : basically you can reach rank 15 EVEN WITHOUT DOING DAMAGE!

Rank 15~12 : you are guarantee to get rank 12..... just keep spam playing button

Rank 12~10 : need a little effort, but free 1 star at reach rank 11 and 10 is really usefull

 

Rank 10~1 : here is the bloody start, if you have 50% WR YOU JUST NEED TO LOSING 40x with TOP XP EARNER! 

 

it mean, the moment you get 70x top XP earner in losing team..... YOU ARE GUARANTEE to get rank 1! do you think people with less than 30% WR exist?

its the easiest way TO REACH RANK 1!

 

if killing team mates is not forbidden, i will massacre my own team.... when they are gone, i will farm top XP earner easily......

 

Nah it doesn’t go that way… save star only preserves your star status before the game started, but you will still need to win in order to get stars and go forward.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
381 posts
9,957 battles

Star saving mechanism for top loser is a great concept. It should be extended to random battles actually. There is no reason you should lose a star if your performance is way above everyone else. The problem with its current implementation is that it does not care about how better the 1st player is compared to the rest of the team. If he got 1,2k base XP and the 2nd runner-up only managed to get 800 base XP - he's totally deserved to keep his star. If the difference is only 100 pts - not so much.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
604 posts
6,756 battles
2 hours ago, HMS_Swiftsure_08 said:

IIRC, the earliest season had no "save star" mechanism. And that season no one in SEA and only a selected minimal few in other servers actually reached rank one. The save star mechanism is there to greatly ease the process.

Without saving star, the stars in the pool only gets generated by "irrevocable" ranks, and the nearest safe rank is 12. And whoever quit ranked halfway will take enourmous amount of stars away from ranked, which resulted in the total amount in the pool gets reduced day by day. However with saving stars, each ranked game adds one star to the pool.

The save star system is not wrong, the battle/economy contribution match is. Star should be saved for the guy doing the greatest contribution, and if that is not the case, then the EXP does not reflect the contribution clearly and precisely.

Not quite true.  There was no star saving system in the first few seasons, but additional stars were added to the pool by each player getting a bonus star every time you went up a rank.  So you'd always have one star on reaching a rank, and would have to lose the next two battles in a row to drop back a rank.  You could then win one battle again and be back to the next rank and one star.

This was a better system imo.  Although it was frustrating to be in a losing team where you completely outplayed the rest of your team, at least everyone always played for the win, and there was much less selfish play.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[MEGA]
Member
4,562 posts
17,552 battles
3 hours ago, SlamUez said:

Yes they are in your clan drakon.

PM me, i'll go talk to people about this, this shouldnt be happening again

edit: give me the replay and screenshots

Edited by drakon233

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
1,386 posts
8,224 battles
56 minutes ago, Moggytwo said:

Not quite true.  There was no star saving system in the first few seasons, but additional stars were added to the pool by each player getting a bonus star every time you went up a rank.  So you'd always have one star on reaching a rank, and would have to lose the next two battles in a row to drop back a rank.  You could then win one battle again and be back to the next rank and one star.

This was a better system imo.  Although it was frustrating to be in a losing team where you completely outplayed the rest of your team, at least everyone always played for the win, and there was much less selfish play.

I guess that system did not add enough stars to the pool…

On a second thought, although it is fundamentally the economy system at fault, the game is too sophiscated for a simple algorithm to interpret and properly reward. How about a clan battle styled system, each winner gets two stars, and losing team each lose one?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
1,105 posts
2 hours ago, HMS_Swiftsure_08 said:

Nah it doesn’t go that way… save star only preserves your star status before the game started, but you will still need to win in order to get stars and go forward.

yes it did like that, no matter how noob are you MM will try to balance your winrate 45%~50%. for example if you reach rank 10 :

* star required to reach rank 1 from rank 10 = R5(4x5) + R1(5x4) = 40 star

* 300 total battle, assume 50% WR :

40x lose top XP earner = 0

150 win = +150 star

110 lose = -95 star

>>> +40 star = rank 1

the problem is, can you become top XP earner 40x in 300 battle with 50% WR?

 

2 minutes ago, HMS_Swiftsure_08 said:

I guess that system did not add enough stars to the pool…

On a second thought, although it is fundamentally the economy system at fault, the game is too sophiscated for a simple algorithm to interpret and properly reward. How about a clan battle styled system, each winner gets two stars, and losing team each lose one?

well, it will make reach rank 1 super easy...... what people need is 50% WR without needed to become top XP earner

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[LLBC]
Member
747 posts
6,851 battles
52 minutes ago, HMS_Swiftsure_08 said:

each winner gets two stars, and losing team each lose one?

I'd vote for each winner gets three stars and each losers loses two, and all players lose one in a draw. Then make it so that it takes more stars to go up each rank.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[MEGA]
Member
4,562 posts
17,552 battles
55 minutes ago, HMS_Swiftsure_08 said:

I guess that system did not add enough stars to the pool…

On a second thought, although it is fundamentally the economy system at fault, the game is too sophiscated for a simple algorithm to interpret and properly reward. How about a clan battle styled system, each winner gets two stars, and losing team each lose one?

makes it way too easy for people to grind to R1 through sheer amount of games put, gain/lose stars at least make sure that it filters out the majority of bad players 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
118 posts
1,833 battles
1 hour ago, drakon233 said:

makes it way too easy for people to grind to R1 through sheer amount of games put, gain/lose stars at least make sure that it filters out the majority of bad players 

*As if ranked isn't an extremely salty grindfest.*

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[MEGA]
Member
4,562 posts
17,552 battles
25 minutes ago, Admiral_224 said:

*As if ranked isn't an extremely salty grindfest.*

there's a reason that i only play up to R5 for the flag these few past seasons

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
48 posts
6,072 battles

uh, same problem here. the grind to rank 10 is easy enough but rank 10 battles is hard to do because of ppl doing their own business.

need a reward for good teamwork to make people more willing to work together

Edited by n00b1e

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
604 posts
6,756 battles
On 1/8/2018 at 12:45 AM, drakon233 said:

makes it way too easy for people to grind to R1 through sheer amount of games put, gain/lose stars at least make sure that it filters out the majority of bad players 

The main problem is the selfish play that save a star promotes.  You should always be playing to win in ranked, but star saving goes against that to some degree.  It's a crappy system, the old one was better.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
906 posts

Raised a support ticket. Got a reply. 

Support passed the issue onto WG investigators. Due to privacy reasons they cannot tell me what actions have been taken or not taken. 

But yeah whatever. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×