4000+=Good
3999 and below=Not Good
4Head
1 Like
I have always maintained this as separating the ranks
sub 2500 low elo
2500-3500 mid elo
3500-4200 high elo
4200+ very high elo.
Believe it or not benchwarmers in the nba are incredible playerss they are just not nba starter material cause those standards are obscenely high. Bench warmers would destroy just about everyone out there
2 Likes
Dont look at my level then please :)))
1 Like
You were using means of time to determine what skill level someone was at, i was simply stating that 5 star is reasonable to achieve masters
2 Likes
3 years in that is going to be tough. Unless that player has FPS experience.
or put the QP in arcade. I rather have people to level up by learning the game in the new teach mode.
this isn’t really a matter of opinion so there is no discussion.
there is a literal bell curve with gold having the most players (average)
basically anyone play or higher is technically good by literal definition (better than average)
1 Like
It doesn’t matter.
It is subjective, and players simply climbing ranks will think is good.
So good = top 1% of players. You are certainly entitled to that opinion.
1 Like
I was joking man. XD
Consistently 4100+ is when they’re good. It’s truly baffling how many bad Masters players there are (is this seriously the top 4 to 1%?), and many up to 4100 are just Masters players on a streak.
And I don’t mean isolated incidents where people are playing badly. I mean many are consistently bad – scapegoating relentlessly, throwing because they’re offended, making obvious mistakes that they refuse to acknowledge, etc etc.
1 Like
High masters is where the game starts becoming more strategic and the playstyle switches up. I’d say, in the grand scheme of things, there.
as someone who is doing bronze to gm
I personally think anyone above 3750 is decent at the game because their mechanics aren’t bad but their gamesense is not on point
as long as a high rated player is shot calling the game, high masters can be turned into gm players when the player shares Strats and such
1 Like
1313 SR, because yes
I understand your point, but I think it falls short and unfortunately parrots what a lot of pro-level players or popular streamers say. Doesn’t mean it’s necessarily correct, though. I would consider “good” as anything above average. 4.4k+ players are literally the best at the game, likely top 100-500 depending on the server location. That’s like saying semi-pro players in any given game (whether esports or standard sports) aren’t good; there’s a significant distinction between good and the best.
I’d argue most ranks know about the fundamentals/basics, but interpreting this information, applying it to play, and executing it correctly are things that are often overlooked. Following your analogy, coaches must all be top 500, which we know is untrue. Also, I don’t see how your description of Diamond+ doesn’t defeat your entire point. “Just because Diamond+ is the top 10% doesn’t make Diamonds good, that just means there is way more bad players below them.” Like, what? I guess people who are in the top 10% of the U.S. income bracket aren’t objectively rich because there are ‘just way more’ people poorer than them?