with all these brackets offering “FREE” rating how do you know who is a good pvper and who is a bad one?
1 Like
For a player that regularly/actively dabbles in ranked probably mid-high glad.
Or somewhere between high glad and r1.
so in order to be considered a good player you need to be a gladiator? LMFAO this season is cooked my boys 
4 Likes
Comfortably gladiator on main class/spec, yeah. 
That’s my opinion, anyways.
1 Like
https://drustvar.com/leaderboard/solo-shuffle-stats/us
Click on rating distributions.
A lot of people lose perspective of how few players get 2400+
1 Like
Very interesting but I’m not sure how it’s relevant.
[quote="Bjomeld-frostmourne, post:5, topic:2043828, full:true"]
https://drustvar.com/leaderboard/solo-shuffle-stats/us
Click on rating distributions.
A lot of people lose perspective of how few players get 2400+
[/quote]
you cant tell the truth like that! 
1 Like
I’ve never been glad material. I quit at about 1800. I just get my elite set and then off to WPvP or random bgs.
That being said, I think a good player is someone who knows their class and how to trade CDs and resetting fights, as well as positioning.
But, reading that you need to be mid to glad to be considered good, is a little disheartening. Then what makes a great player? R1 and tournament champions?
5 Likes
It depends who you ask. If you asked me if you’re a good player I’d say yup.
1 Like
One of the most fried takes I’ve ever seen, e.g., more or less equivalent to asserting that you’re not good unless you’re in the top 0.5-1% of the one bracket that many don’t even bother to participate in due to the high barrier to entry there is in terms of finding teammates of similar skill, personality, and schedules to play with (not to mention needing said teammates to be playing specs that compliment yours so that you’re playing something that is viable in the meta).
Not only that, but apparently you can’t be considered a good pvper unless you have regular/dedicated partners (or a network of people) to play/push 3s with.
Hate to burst some of the “3v3 is the epitome of skill” bros, but I’d argue that those getting r1 titles from shuffle and blitz (or being close to getting those titles) makes you just as good if not better than many mid-high tier glads (especially when considering which season(s) is/are being referenced).
This take of essentially saying “if you don’t do 3s you’re not good” is also toxic (imo), and tbh it’s a contributing factor in the reasons as to why wow pvp participation is steadily declining [e.g., especially in 3s, due to the general/overall attitude that the higher rated community has towards newer players and/or players still trying to learn and/or improve].
If being real and objective (e.g., ignoring the extreme bias comments of 3v3 mains that are mostly worthless these days), the following is my opinion [e.g., noting that the ratings listed below are with respect to reaching these ratings by the end of most (not necessarily all) seasons]:
If you’re able to get a rank 1 title in any rated pvp bracket, you’re an AMAZING pvper (aside from maybe tank specs idk);
If you’re able to get 2400+cr in any rated pvp bracket, you’re a GREAT pvper;
If you’re able to get 2100+cr in any rated pvp bracket, you’re a GOOD pvper;
If you’re able to get 1800+cr in any rated pvp bracket, you’re an AVERAGE OR SLIGHTLY ABOVE AVERAGE pvper;
If you’re able to get 1600+cr in any rated pvp bracket, you’re a BELOW AVERAGE pvper, but not by a lot; and
If you’re able to get 1400-1599cr in any rated pvp bracket, you’re BELOW AVERAGE by a lot, likely due to one or more of being new/still learning, lack of game knowledge, not using keybinds, not using essentially required addons, poor mouse/camera movement, etc. (e.g., you still have significant strides to make in order to improve).
Alternatively, I’d say that if you’re able to reach the goal(s) that sincerely make you happy/feel accomplished, then you are a good pvper, even if that means being below the ratings indicated above [e.g., if getting 1600 for the free piece of gear, or 1800 for the elite set transmog make you feel good/accomplished, then you’re a good pvper].
24 Likes
I prefer 3s, but I like shuffle, and I agree and disagree with this statement. It REALLY depends on how you define “high glad” and what class is getting their shuffle title.
That being said, usually there’s always overlap and the people getting r1 shuffle titles are also r1/multi r1 unless it’s a super high-pop class like war/hunter/ret/lock/sp.
Ya that’s absurd. Bigdam is one of the best players in the game right now and he is a shuffle hero over 3s and is just now really pushing 3s for the first time.
I disagree here. There is elitism and toxicity everywhere, but I see WAY more toxicity at lower/mid ratings than I ever do at higher ratings.
Also this is well said!
2 Likes
I mean, it’s just my opinion. There are some exceptions but that’s just kind of what I go off of. 
If somebody thinks that Duelist or Elite in a solo queue mode with +500 inflation is good then that’s their opinion, and that’s fine.
There’s also context.
A little off the mark here because it tends to be more of a crab in bucket thing.
They are dinosaurs watching meteor after meteor crash into the planet as their soon to be dead dead mode (world) slowly dies over time.
Imagine saying only the 1% are good. Lamaooooo.
11 Likes
It me.
Imma good pvper.
2 Likes
finally someone gets it. i mean these forums told me my 2400 in shuffle still put me below average as an arms warrior no less
1 Like
Kenny out here catching big fish early in the morning
what i dont get is if 2400 in shuffle really is below average why do i face so many rank 1, awc , glad level players between 2300-2400 MMR? that dont make no gosh darn sense muh boy 
3 Likes
Tbf, he’s not saying 2400 is below average for everybody. He’s saying that time on a class/spec is relevant to what’s considered average/good. So, I think his logic would argue that those players are just passing through and/or on alts.
Agreed, though I do think there should be a caveat here.
In my limited experience (when I’ve been invited to much higher rated Discords in the past) they are a more vulgar experience.
Not direct toxicity, but if someone is fairly thin skinned, it could be perceived that way.
2 Likes
Oooh, good point and excellent edition!
1 Like