Wasn’t the old way the laziest and cheapest way? It never factored in any of the other numerous variables that went into matchmaking, it gave less bonus stars and was heavier on the grind, and it was a poor distribution of packs and rewards with it skewed favorably only for R15 and R5 players. The new system didn’t make sense at first, but overall it’s better for players to be matched closer to skill level than actual rank which is why Rank is more a display of effort and time than it is true skill. And that’s what the new system is going for.
1 Like
Well, that’s all a consequence of not actually having your rank directly tied to your skill level.
It should be.
Hmm. Well were that the case I probably never would be legend.
Then again; I never bothered with Legend or Ranked at all until Blizzard began tying rewards to ranked play.
Back in the day when I was paying far more into the game I just played
Casual.
Then Blizzard began the Standard Wild thing and the rewards became much better, particularly if F2P for Ranked play, so I began playing Ranked all the time.
Now days it’s practically mandatory to play Ranked.
Only if you don’t deserve to be.
The existence of a repeating grind fools people into thinking that all that is needed is the grind. If you’re not good enough, you won’t ever make legend in any of the systems they’ve used, and you shouldn’t.
You should feel terrible when a diamond player beats a legend player.
I beat golden portrait legend cardback players all the time with my trash decks and I rarely go over diamond 5. With that said, you shouldn’t feel bad because you all playing with netdecks to climb the ladder. If you’re both climbing using netdecks, then you should be good to be playing against each other.
The only difference between a Low legend player and a Diamond one is the number of games.
People don’t become better Just cause they attained the rank dude.
1 Like
i think I’m probably good enough under the current system.
I’ve done it five times now in a row.
Now the old Ranks? Idk. highest I ever got then was rank 5.
So…
Been playing a lot on alt accounts and honestly it feels harder to me to get through gold with no bonus stars than it does to get through diamond on my main.
Anyone else experience this or is it just me
Wut, no way, unless you play a deck that does pretty badly against Rez Priest.
Btw Mallenroh; you ignored me;(
There isn’t a huge gap between rank 5 and rank 1 in the old system. It’s substantial, but not huge.
You think you haven’t improved in the meantime?
1 Like
Getting to Legend was never “that hard”.
You need to invest a lot of time plus play the broken tier 1 decks and there you go…
Oh I definitely have, idk if it would hold up in the old ranks though lol:)
The system only allows one response before another player posts and i didn’t see your post.
So, this is me, paying attention:)
1 Like
Considering the often hypercompetitive nature of Diamon 4-1 and that many people (especially at the mid/lower MMR level) tend to “relax” and play more fun/meme/experimental decks once they hit Legend, matching players from that general bracket with Diamond players may very well be less gatekeeping and more of a reprieve for those people who are trying to climb.
Just a thought.
Gold/plat players get matched against legend players. My friend irl and i were both playing at my house. I got matched up with him when he was a gold player in ranked. Go figure it was his rank up to plat game. I just conceeded.
1 Like
Why?
A Bronze player can beat a pro player with good draw and a deck advantage.
People put way too much stock in rank.
Even some of the top 100 Legend players were only there because they spammed enough DH when it was broken.
Now that DH is worse, a lot of them started tanking mmr lmao.
Rank is largely an illusionary representation of skill (oh, I’m high Legend btw).
I would even argue that Legend (maybe not high Legend) and Diamond are at about the same skill level.
No one should ever feel terrible for losing to someone who just doesn’t/didn’t have as much time to play the game (which is what I believe it boils down to for the most part).
1 Like
I am actually with you on this point, I have hit legend twice with my rogue, but now most of the time I am happy to just get down to D5 every month, and then play decks I enjoy, shoot I am currently playing cthun/yogg rogue and am back down to d6
1 Like
If I see them on D1 and they’re playing an off meta deck, I’ll usually put in a couple of rounds and then concede.
If they’re playing a meta deck, then I’ll usually try smashing their hopes and dreams.
2 Likes
A lot of time and broken tier 1 decks were still needed, which made it more difficult if you had anything mid T2 or lower.
Nowadays you can D5 - Legend with many more options just as long as you know the meta, and the number of games needed are less due to the minimization of grinding via star MMR bonus. You were really battling yourself when it came to the old system, and how well you could endure the actual grind rather than the difficulty of the matchups.
I personally feel rank has a false correlation to skill; period. It, in no way, is a realistic representation of skill. Sure skill will absolutely make a difference in making plays with the same cards in-hand and same board and same scenario between 2 different players… if we are indeed attempting to define and compare skill and where it might matter, but not in achieving any rank.
You can play a mediocre off-meta deck (or no-tier deck) and achieve the rank of legend. The sooner you do it in the month, the higher your rank.
Rank in Hearthstone is sadly not a measure of ones skill. Just a measure of ones persistence and/or luck. Invariably, with the percentage probabilities of deck, a bot could hit legend.
You know, like they do now.