I saw that drustvar recently implemented a rating distribution section on their website.
being the nerd I am, I love it. This tool visualises the data well.
Using this data I wanted to see how 3v3 and RSS rating compare in percentiles (without having to calculate it myself).
While I recently made a post about 3v3 percentiles this was before the data was available on drustvar. For the sake of consistency all data collected is from drustvar except for the pvp ratings (this doesnt effect anything).
Here is the data in text form:
Rating/RSS%/3v3%
- 2800 / 100 / 100
- 2700 / 99.9993 / 99.96
- 2600 / 99.9928 / 99.81
- 2500 / 99.8677 / 99.94
- 2400 / 99.6444 / 98.49
- 2300 / 98.9824 / 97.21
- 2200 / 98.4707 / 95.15
- 2100 / 97.3303 / 92.01
- 2000 / 94.7813 / 86.78
- 1900 / 92.0761 / 78.41
- 1800 / 87.4631 / 70.79
- 1700 / 75.5621 / 60.59
- 1600 / 66.2947 / 48.87
- 1500 / 50.6689 / 34.64
- 1400 / 38.8705 / 21.52
- 1300 / 27.2334 / 14.38
- 1200 / 17.4789 / 9.96
- 1100 /10.0103 / 6.41
- 1000 / 4.4736 / 3.18
Conclusions:
The data shows that generally speaking having the same cr in both brackets would place you at a higher percentile in RSS.
While I was not able to find all the data for total players in each bracket on drustvar using checkpvp’s rank 1 cutoff we can make an educated guess.
Rank 1 3v3: 102 players | = 102k 3s players.
Rank 1 RSS: 236. | = 236k RSS players (with spec overlap).
My take:
Some may argue that this means RSS requires more skill. I do not believe this statement to be true, however playing in no voice with varying comps is something you need to do in RSS in contrast to 3s (for the most part). I believe that 3s is severly under played and hence why the percentiles are lower for the same rating. Esentially, the 3s sample is more dedicated and fewer than the RSS sample. With less even distribution, the percentile difference becomes apparent. While the 236k players who play shuffle may include some who play >1 specilisations the numbers still show how much more popular RSS is than 3v3.
Thank you and have a nice day.
Sources:
2 Likes
It’s neither true nor false.
If trying to lump every quantifiable skill into one aspect, then 3s would technically require more skill [e.g., teamwork, communication, precision, finesse, playing around the given meta, etc.], but solo shuffle certainly requires more individual accountability/skill and in more unpredictable/less scripted scenarios [e.g., having to rely more on yourself than partners, having to be a playmaker to climb, adapting on the fly to a lot more comps and the generally unpredictable nature of random partners, having to play with and against everyone in the lobby, not having voice to coordinate kills and cooldowns, etc.].
You’re definitely right in that participation skews the numbers, which is largely due to how much more accessible shuffle is (I’m not necessarily certain if shuffle would be more popular if 3s had a solo queue button), but in the grand scheme of things, the skillsets required to succeed in each bracket have a lot of overlap.
In other words, if you can get rank 1 in shuffle, I’m pretty confident that you can get rank 1 in regular 3s, and vice versa (if you can find two others of comparable skill and have a decent comp). Similarly, the difficulty required to get 1600-2400 in shuffle vs 3s I would imagine is comparable as well (not accounting for the extra difficulty in finding partners and building synergy).
Anyways, thanks for putting in the effort to collect and present the data 
1 Like
You gotta learn how to create a table.
| Rating |
RSS% |
3v3% |
| 2800 |
100 |
100 |
| 2700 |
99.9993 |
99.96 |
| 2600 |
99.9928 |
99.81 |
| 2500 |
99.8677 |
99.94 |
| 2400 |
99.6444 |
98.49 |
| 2300 |
98.9824 |
97.21 |
| 2200 |
98.4707 |
95.15 |
| 2100 |
97.3303 |
92.01 |
| 2000 |
94.7813 |
86.78 |
| 1900 |
92.0761 |
78.41 |
| 1800 |
87.4631 |
70.79 |
| 1700 |
75.5621 |
60.59 |
| 1600 |
66.2947 |
48.87 |
| 1500 |
50.6689 |
34.64 |
| 1400 |
38.8705 |
21.52 |
| 1300 |
27.2334 |
14.38 |
| 1200 |
17.4789 |
9.96 |
| 1100 |
10.0103 |
6.41 |
| 1000 |
4.4736 |
3.18 |
5 Likes
I imply the same thing to my boss and coworkers and they think tables are gimmicks/crutches
I need a new job
Cant find it in the options.
ur right about this.
You are more than welcome 
Thank for providing me this resource.
for anyone who doesn’t want to go read that
Top is for headers, second is for alignment. - is left aligned, :-: is center aligned, -: is right aligned, and then you just add however many rows you want. The amount of columns in the header and formatting rows need to be the same, but if you leave them out in the further rows, the column will just be empty.
|Header 1|Header 2|Header 3|
|-|:-:|-:|
|column 1 left aligned|column 2 centered|column 3 right aligned|
|row 2|column 2|
|row 3||column 3|
turns into
| Header 1 |
Header 2 |
Header 3 |
| column 1 left aligned |
column 2 centered |
column 3 right aligned |
| row 2 |
column 2 |
|
| row 3 |
|
column 3 |
