Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  

ST 0.9.11, Ranked Battles Overhaul

4 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

210 posts
12,074 battles

This post has been out for a day, and I'm surprised there are no comments here regarding the change. Though there is another post somewhere in the forum.

I am happy to see WG trying to fix something that is actually broken (kinda), but I don't see how the main issue with the current Ranked System is solved.

Some people would say the star-retention system is problematic, because it encourages selfish plays, and I surely agree on this, but I'll consider the ranking system as the main issue with the current Ranked game mode. Let's be real, if you attained Rank 1, or say, a higher rank, it does not mean you are a skillful player, it only means you are very patient.

The truth that rankings have nothing to do with skills is kind of annoying, given that WoWS emphasizes team play, you cannot win alone if the rest of your team are incompetent. The amount of frustration is huge when only 2 or 3 competent players know what they are doing or should be doing, and they ended up ranking second or third in the team and lost the game because the rest of the team are just camping around the border or not actively participating the battle. You did mention in the article that there are means to "ensure quality matchmaking", which is to time gate the ranked season, but this is not very flexible due to time zones, and honestly the matchmaking was not good either per se. Ranked battles are meant to be a competitive game mode, but with a matchmaking with zero reference to player skill levels? This just doesn't make sense. I am sure many people have met players who do not support team play or do not know how to aim even when they reached Rank 5, and wonder how these people get to the Premier League. Logically you can assume a player to be more successful (as in winning percentage) if they are skillful, but with enough games played, anyone can attain a high rank. If you never consider player skills in your matchmaking, ranked battles would never be as competitive as it should be.

When you give rewards to players based on the amount of victory they gain, the issue isn't solved either, because like I said you cannot win every match by being competent yourself. You want to make resources to be more accessible to all players, but you are actually distributing resources in a competitive means, it is more sensible when the best players are worthy to gain the most out of these game modes, just like how only the best teams can gain all steels from the entire season of a clan battle. Considering you are already inflating the resources by distributing them in daily missions, snowflakes event, and other channels like the dockyard, it makes sense to strictly control how accessible the rewards in competitive game modes are.

Some people say the new system is like the way how it works in League of Legends. I don't know about this because I never played LOL before, but to me, the new system is like the Clan Battle system in WoWS, where you need to play qualification matches to advance to a higher league. The difference between both design is that, one involves stars, which is given or lost by a win or a defeat, and the other system comes with a point gain and loss. Since the star-retention system has been criticized with its issue, I'd prefer having the points system in Ranked Battle as well. First, you can adjust how many point one gain or lose base on their performance in game, which is more forgiving than losing a star right away regardless of your position in the team, when you did not rank as the MVP; secondly, it would be fair to award players who fought well in battles even when they suffered a defeat by awarding players with points even in a defeat. This might sound controversial but I think this is worth discussing and implementing.


  1. Use a ELO-like scale in the matchmaking system and match players of the similar skill level in Ranked game modes, thus controlling the amount of players who could eventually access the rewards of a higher league.
  2. Use the points system similar to Clan Battles instead of the star system, adjust the points gained or lost based on how players perform in a match (require complicate calculations of player contribution, such as spotting, tanking, damage dealt, capture points, defend points, etc. basically everything concluded in experience gained, but some parameters could have been missing).
  • Cool 2

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites
7,107 posts
11,687 battles


What I still think of Ranked in WoWS: 

8 hours ago, Paladinum said:

The problem is Ranked in WoWS is measured by a horrible system. The star stuff still exists, because (stupid) reasons. Instead of an actual skill-measuring system like SC 2 MMR or chess ELO, we have stars in WoWS. 

The stars measure nothing because I can be a potato and still advance if I get decent teams multiple battles in a row. So much for a "competitive" mode.

I'd prefer a system where I could lose a match, but the system measures my skills (or lack thereof) and rewards me for getting better at playing, not at getting good teams. Which means I get rewarded for reaching certain MMR/ELO number, not for reaching a number of wins, some of which I may not even deserve. Imagine getting to Rank 1 because people get good teams instead of genuinely playing well. They don't deserve it.

The Ranked rework doesn't get rid of the "winning is everything" system. That's a problem.

I'm not even considering the damage- and win-centric economy for this comment.


5 years have passed and yet WG are still audaciously unwilling to make anything akin to a skill-measuring system. Newsflash: Ranked isn't one. Five years.

So much for a "PvP-focused" game.

Edited by Paladinum
  • Cool 3

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this