Verytis Posted January 9 Share Posted January 9 CVs and Subs are now banned from both silver and gold ranked. Naturally, without buffs to ships whose strengths are focused in AA, Mobility or ASW. They continue to be quietly pushed out of the mode as well. The mode will continue to be further more dominated by select BBs and large/bow-tanking cruisers. However, I'm sure the "majority" will enjoy playing against the same small selection of balanced ships that dominate the gamemode instead. 5 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thornzero Posted January 9 Share Posted January 9 What is interesting is cv/sub are included in Bronze and I wonder how many people will skip ranked that usually stayed in Bronze to avoid the cv/sub in Silver last iteration. 4 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Itwastuesday Posted January 9 Share Posted January 9 Could have just done 5/7/9 instead? But I'll take it. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daniel_Allan_Clark Posted January 9 Share Posted January 9 Tacit admissions that both classes are broken... 7 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hugh_Ruka Posted January 9 Share Posted January 9 might be my first Ranked season that I will reach Gold ... 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Verytis Posted January 9 Author Share Posted January 9 59 minutes ago, Daniel_Allan_Clark said: Tacit admissions that both classes are broken... All this shows is that everyone wants to play the same broken ships without having a counter against them. Why bring in ships like an AACL or the eventual CW CA with ASW specialty, when you can have another Petro bow-tanking harder than a BC. It is an indirect banning of those other ships by stripping them of any usable roles, in favour of the same stagnate meta that nobody even particularly likes. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daniel_Allan_Clark Posted January 9 Share Posted January 9 33 minutes ago, Verytis said: All this shows is that everyone wants to play the same broken ships without having a counter against them. Why bring in ships like an AACL or the eventual CW CA with ASW specialty, when you can have another Petro bow-tanking harder than a BC. It is an indirect banning of those other ships by stripping them of any usable roles, in favour of the same stagnate meta that nobody even particularly likes. Blame the reward system for this...which is also WG's fault. 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Verytis Posted January 9 Author Share Posted January 9 (edited) 22 minutes ago, Daniel_Allan_Clark said: Blame the reward system for this...which is also WG's fault. I'm curious how you could somehow scapegoat the reward system for this when it is clearly a balancing issue. Edit: also add psychology as an issue with the playerbase Edited January 9 by Verytis 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daniel_Allan_Clark Posted January 9 Share Posted January 9 28 minutes ago, Verytis said: I'm curious how you could somehow scapegoat the reward system for this when it is clearly a balancing issue. Edit: also add psychology as an issue with the playerbase WG sets the rewards to value wins and in game performance for certain criteria...therefore players select OP ships and strategies to maximize reward return... WG refuses to actually balance OP ships and strats...then blames players for the meta that WGs borked reward setup and game balance decisions brought about. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Verytis Posted January 9 Author Share Posted January 9 28 minutes ago, Daniel_Allan_Clark said: WG sets the rewards to value wins and in game performance for certain criteria...therefore players select OP ships and strategies to maximize reward return... WG refuses to actually balance OP ships and strats...then blames players for the meta that WGs borked reward setup and game balance decisions brought about. Thank you for stating how ship balance is the ultimately the core of the problem, in a roundabout manner. Also for bumping for my thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daniel_Allan_Clark Posted January 9 Share Posted January 9 7 minutes ago, Verytis said: Thank you for stating how ship balance is the ultimately the core of the problem, in a roundabout manner. Also for bumping for my thread. Yes. Though I would go a bit further and say that WG staff are the core of the problem...as they determine game balance decisions... 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ArIskandir Posted January 9 Share Posted January 9 4 hours ago, thornzero said: What is interesting is cv/sub are included in Bronze and I wonder how many people will skip ranked that usually stayed in Bronze to avoid the cv/sub in Silver last iteration. Gotta climb the ladder! 4 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ocsimano18 Posted January 9 Share Posted January 9 (edited) I have been playing T8/T10 ranked this season, and neither CVs nor subs dominated. You can dominate as a good DD player, as the majority of DD players suck. You cannot carry in a BB, because the match is usually decided by DD play. See my stats: Edited January 9 by Ocsimano18 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jakob Knight Posted January 9 Share Posted January 9 (edited) 4 hours ago, Daniel_Allan_Clark said: Tacit admissions that both classes are broken... I think it has more to do with the smaller sizes of teams at those leagues not really supporting ships that are not designed to contest cap points. If a team takes a CV in Silver or Gold, that's five capping ships instead of six. Same with a Sub. Of course, it could also be that WG has decided that the playerbase is just not skillful enough in general to deal with CVs and Subs in a Ranked setting, but that would not explain why they are permitted in Bronze (and in fact works against that idea as well as the idea they are somehow not balanced, as Silver and Gold are supposed to be where the better players of all ships end up). The only thing that really changes is the team size going from 7 to 6. Edited January 9 by Jakob Knight 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daniel_Allan_Clark Posted January 9 Share Posted January 9 12 minutes ago, Jakob Knight said: I think it has more to do with the smaller sizes of teams at those leagues not really supporting ships that are not designed to contest cap points. If a team takes a CV in Silver or Gold, that's five capping ships instead of six. Same with a Sub. Of course, it could also be that WG has decided that the playerbase is just not skillful enough in general to deal with CVs and Subs in a Ranked setting, but that would not explain why they are permitted in Bronze (and in fact works against that idea as well as the idea they are somehow not balanced, as Silver and Gold are supposed to be where the better players of all ships end up). The only thing that really changes is the team size going from 7 to 6. CVs act as major vehicles to PREVENT capping, I find. CVs in a short team setup are even more powerful than they are in larger teams. My bet is that WG doesn't want either in silver or gold because they are too powerful in terms of battle influence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ArIskandir Posted January 9 Share Posted January 9 35 minutes ago, Daniel_Allan_Clark said: My bet is that WG doesn't want either in silver or gold because they are too powerful in terms of battle influence. Or they don't want them in Silver & Gold because they want to provide players with "safe spaces" to enjoy the game and "play more". Balance and battle influence having little to do with it as it has never been a real consideration nor is for Bronze. Imo, CV+Sub have a significant impact over player engagement of a (more experienced) segment of the player base. Rolling back changes or limiting them in Randoms is a default not-possible idea, the best next thing is providing other PvP arenas as release valve for those who want a CV/Sub free experience. I think it can be an indirect "popularity" test, if there's a sudden surge in the number of players moving up to Silver and Gold in Ranked it would be a very inequivocal data point. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Col_NASTY Posted January 9 Share Posted January 9 4 hours ago, Verytis said: All this shows is that everyone wants to play the same broken ships without having a counter against them. How can this possibly be true? No counter means they are never sunk by anything. There is a CLEAR reason why both classes are banned from KOTS as well. That is all 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jakob Knight Posted January 9 Share Posted January 9 (edited) 1 hour ago, Daniel_Allan_Clark said: CVs act as major vehicles to PREVENT capping, I find. CVs in a short team setup are even more powerful than they are in larger teams. My bet is that WG doesn't want either in silver or gold because they are too powerful in terms of battle influence. They are just as powerful at T6 against T6, if not moreso with the weaker ships at that level of play. The only thing both have in common is they are designed to die quickly if they attempt to cap. 16 minutes ago, ArIskandir said: Or they don't want them in Silver & Gold because they want to provide players with "safe spaces" to enjoy the game and "play more". Balance and battle influence having little to do with it as it has never been a real consideration nor is for Bronze. Imo, CV+Sub have a significant impact over player engagement of a (more experienced) segment of the player base. Rolling back changes or limiting them in Randoms is a default not-possible idea, the best next thing is providing other PvP arenas as release valve for those who want a CV/Sub free experience. I think it can be an indirect "popularity" test, if there's a sudden surge in the number of players moving up to Silver and Gold in Ranked it would be a very inequivocal data point. The problem with that reasoning is the the players getting to Silver and Gold will get there playing against or as Subs and CVs, so a sudden surge of players getting to Silver and Gold could prove they are OP or UP equally, or that players enjoy playing against them so much they shoot right out of Bronze. Too many unrestricted data points for it to be used in any conclusive decision making. As I mentioned, though, both CVs and Subs are meant to avoid capping, and it seems the smaller size of teams, putting more of a requirement for each ship to pull more weight in winning the match, just makes having support units too much of a drain on a team that will likely take losses and still be expected to have a chance to cap. Of course, WG could simply have tossed two dice to find out how to set up Ranked this time for all we know. Edited January 9 by Jakob Knight 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ArIskandir Posted January 9 Share Posted January 9 5 minutes ago, Jakob Knight said: The problem with that reasoning is the the players getting to Silver and Gold will get there playing against or as Subs and CVs, so a sudden surge of players getting to Silver and Gold could prove they are OP or UP equally, or that players enjoy playing against them so much they shoot right out of Bronze. Too many unrestricted data points for it to be used in any conclusive decision making. I think the whole point of the excersize is preciselly having to go through Bronze to get the carrot/reward of no CV/Sub matches, it means players have to make some investment to get the "reward", making it even more telling. Also, if they enjoy Sub/CVs that much, they can always choose to remain at Bronze. But I agree with WG you never know for sure what's the immediate intention. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andrewbassg Posted January 9 Share Posted January 9 1 hour ago, Daniel_Allan_Clark said: CVs act as major vehicles to PREVENT capping, I find. CVs in a short team setup are even more powerful than they are in larger teams. This. And... 2 hours ago, ArIskandir said: Gotta climb the ladder! 26 minutes ago, ArIskandir said: Or they don't want them in Silver & Gold because they want to provide players with "safe spaces" to enjoy the game and "play more". Balance and battle influence having little to do with it as it has never been a real consideration nor is for Bronze. Imo, CV+Sub have a significant impact over player engagement of a (more experienced) segment of the player base. Rolling back changes or limiting them in Randoms is a default not-possible idea, the best next thing is providing other PvP arenas as release valve for those who want a CV/Sub free experience. I think it can be an indirect "popularity" test, if there's a sudden surge in the number of players moving up to Silver and Gold in Ranked it would be a very inequivocal data point. ....this. 5 hours ago, Hugh_Ruka said: might be my first Ranked season that I will reach Gold ... Yuk. Always stopped at silver. No desire existed to subject myself volutarily to torture. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andrewbassg Posted January 9 Share Posted January 9 (edited) 5 hours ago, Verytis said: All this shows is that everyone wants to play the same broken ships without having a counter against them. Why bring in ships like an AACL or the eventual CW CA with ASW specialty, when you can have another Petro bow-tanking harder than a BC. Ermmm....no. in reduced line up modes all ships have to do more. AA Cl;s lacks the tankiness to push and generally are relegated to defence or support roles. Also losses are more impactful, ergo people will obviously favour more tanky ships. Not to mention that higher tiers are increasingly lethal. 4 hours ago, Verytis said: I'm curious how you could somehow scapegoat the reward system for thi Simple. For example subs have enhanced rewards. Also as the result of the ec reworks, the balance/meta shifted towards ships with big guns, ergo with big alpha potential. I can shoot gazillion of times with a Jinan, for MUCH less rewards and also impact as a Petro. i have to continuously pew pew for abysmal rewards and i have to watch my bum to not get...yeah that. In the same time frame. Much MUCH more work. So yes, it is at least equally, a rewards issue. Edited January 9 by Andrewbassg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daniel_Allan_Clark Posted January 9 Share Posted January 9 32 minutes ago, Jakob Knight said: The only thing both have in common is they are designed to die quickly if they attempt to cap. BBs are also designed to die quickly if they attempt to CAP, as our many cruisers. I'm not sure this aspect is as important as you think it is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aethervox Posted January 9 Share Posted January 9 8 hours ago, Verytis said: However, I'm sure the "majority" will enjoy playing against the same small selection of balanced ships that dominate the gamemode instead. ROFL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ArIskandir Posted January 9 Share Posted January 9 20 minutes ago, Daniel_Allan_Clark said: BBs are also designed to die quickly if they attempt to CAP, as our many cruisers. The problem about BBs capping is not surviving the ordeal, which is quite possible... the actual problem is being able to finish the capture, which most of the time you won't as everyone and their mothers will reset you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sailor_Moon Posted January 9 Share Posted January 9 1 hour ago, ArIskandir said: Or they don't want them in Silver & Gold because they want to provide players with "safe spaces" to enjoy the game and "play more". Balance and battle influence having little to do with it as it has never been a real consideration nor is for Bronze. Imo, CV+Sub have a significant impact over player engagement of a (more experienced) segment of the player base. Rolling back changes or limiting them in Randoms is a default not-possible idea, the best next thing is providing other PvP arenas as release valve for those who want a CV/Sub free experience. I think it can be an indirect "popularity" test, if there's a sudden surge in the number of players moving up to Silver and Gold in Ranked it would be a very inequivocal data point. I thnik you've got something here, tbh. ~-~º('. ' )º~-~ 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now