Maybe if you played a little more ranked standard, you’d feel differently about rank, skill, and how they intersect. This is not a jab you, at all. As you climb, however, you will notice that your opponents become better, and get a better impression of the ranking system.
Have you not seen the hundreds and even thousands of posts of the players unable to climb past platinum or old rank 10 despite playing for years. Are you trolling ?
I’m asking for your rank because I have yet to see a high rank player who thinks the way you do, you have that loser mentality, I would like to know how many games of HS you’ve played and what’s the highest rank you’ve achieved.
So no proof just a bold assertion got it.
What’s there to proof aside from my experience? I’ve known and had lots of guys in my friends list that couldn’t get to high ranks despite playing every day ?
Are you suggesting this is impossible?! Killuminati for instance admits he’s never been past d10 despite playing a lot and trying his hardest to win.
Is this not a proof to you ? Or is he an alien ? Does he not count ? Why ?
So every person who claims the game is rigged is correct because “that is there experience” got it
Did I say that, or anything like it? .
I am aware of how ranking system works.
It’s about the actual number of supposed “only 1% player BS” not the actual climb.
Someone else talked about 1% something, not me.
I’m trying to say that if you played more in ranked, you’d come to realize that the competition becomes better as you become better. You notice that you’re matched against players of similar skill, exactly how matchmaking functions. If you don’t play much, it’s hard to gauge your skill because there’s very little data. If you played more, you’d eventually reach the appropriate rank based upon your wins and losses, in other words, your level of skill.
You say this, but then demonstrate in your comments that you don’t. It’s very clear that rank and skill are closely related, as if your skill determines your rank. Of course, there are cases wherein this isn’t true because some players might be memeing or whatever. For the majority of players trying to climb, their rank reflects their skill. There’s really no argument to be made against this.
1 Like
You seem to be twisting something
Can you point to where I said that rank = no skill. Or that the ladder did the opposite of what you are saying?
People are saying trying to inflate the number active players vs the ones actually trying to reach a high rank. An using that as a bases of their skill claim.
I stopped looking at your comments after this.
1 Like
1 Like
An nothing there about denying how rank system does not work or there is no skill in hearthstone.
You seem to not understanding something lol
Right… I give up. If you’ve changed your mind, that’s fine. But, clearly, as I pointed out (as did Scrotie), you were previously denying that rank is based upon skill. But, whatever.
1 Like
Yes because if 40% of players who try for legend hit legend. That “skill” ceiling is low. An yet the only counter argument is
X amount of people play hearthstone
X amount of people are in legend
Just because Liam is 5 foot 7 inches doesn’t mean Liam doesn’t exist. Liam is a short king.
Just because the skill ceiling is “low” doesn’t mean that skill doesn’t exist. It just means you fit comfortably under it.
I’m not the one trying to fluff up an unknown ceiling to dismiss people’s opinions on certain subjects lol
Or use it as a gauge of my opinion on an internet forum.
How do you gauge someone’s skill at the game that you’ve never seen play if not by his rank ?
Is it crazy to think someone’s rank is typically a good way to measure their skills ? The better you are at the game, the higher your rank should be. Sounds like simple logic to me.
How can you possibly think the gold player who plays 2 games a day is just as good as the guy who plays 10 games a day reaching legend every month ? Even if they both mastered the game mechanics, the guy who plays more has a lot more knowledge on the meta and knows how to mulligan according to matchups much better.
That would imply everyone tries to reach the highest rank possible.
Is it not possible for two people to be on an equal level BUT one of them players don’t grind the ladder while the other one does?
Not everyone on ladder is trying to climb; most players on ladder are trying to climb, however.
It sure is. But, what’s your point?
So rank is not a solid way of gauging skill.
I mean someone comes on and claims the game is rigged people demand evidence.
The same thing should apply when people try to claim only X% of people are capable of achieving said rank because of a skill requirement.
Both require evidence correct?