Why Representation is a bad indicator

Because no one wants to reroll alts and my guess is that 70% of representation this season is a reflection of last season. Thread.

What would be a better indicator than active ladder rep though? The 1-2 tourneys a year?

Nah. That’s a bad one too. Maybe the tourney represents a class at maximum potential, but doesn’t represent every player below. I like to look at things as 2 groups of players. Above and below 2k. Like, below 2k in 2’s, almost every match is a warrior, but above 2k, representation charts show something a little different. This makes me believe that their is a sub2k meta thats slightly different than above 2k. Easy classes, or classes that get auto-win conditions when both teams play bad (bm, warrior, other team auto-ooms if both teams played badly and no one dies, warrior/bm/sin rogue favor.) Tend to be played more often below 2k. More complicated classes and comps (rmp for example, I know people hate to hear that but hear me out) don’t exist as often at low rating. I can even vouch, if you play rmp below 2k, you’re probably not going to do well, as its a comp that relies on the other players in order to setup, and retreat go’s. RMP is a fantastic comp when all 3 players are pretty decent, but it’s a terrible comp when every player is just “okay”. On the other hand, somthing like ret/war/heal or dh/dk/resto sham is seen A LOT more below 2k rating, than say, rmp or wizard cleaves since those comps are easier to tunnel single targets on a interrupt rotation. Something that can be easily done by sub-average players.

1 Like

If 9.2 is delayed, it’d be awesome if 9.1.5 was focused around alt catchup and a ton of QOL improvements to encourage what players are still around to continue sticking around.

8 Likes

This is pretty accurate, tbh. It’s also a huge reason why rating for gear is a horrible idea.

2 Likes

Represenation absolutely matters just not on its own. You need to discern other factors together to form a reasonable conclusion.

2 Likes

Just saying representation only represents certain players, and if we continue to only cater to those players, then barrier to entry will still be insanely high as the meta is only balanced around glads/tournament. There needs to be a nice middle where every player can enjoy pvp while keeping the glads/tourney players interested and fair. Turning the dial one direction too far in either way is bad for arena as a whole. This is sort of why I made that thread about how maledict should be reserved for 2k and above players. Maledict made sub2k play very very fast paced and unenjoyable for a lot of players while giving a change in pace that high rated players asked for.

You are 100% correct but unfortunately the arena forum regulars are not interested in this concept despite it being in their best interest and health of the entire PvP scene.

1 Like

Nah this website is literally the best example

Outlaw rogues F tier, SV hunters D tier, BM hunters B tier, Rdruids B tier all on rep ROFL

O yeah boomkins and destro locks are on the same level of strength too wtf???

Idk you have to be able to have somewhat of an understanding of the game to understand that rep just does not mean everything. Usually it’s kind of obvious what’s good or has potential too anyways.

3 Likes

" Based solely on rating from 4063 leaderboard entries. Please see the [FAQ] for more info, including important caveats."

it literally says it on their website

people tend to gravitate towards what’s easier, its called the path of least resistance.

I read the website, no idea why you even sent that, you realize basing it off rating is the same as basing it off representation

BM hunter being in B tier by trying to use that data is a sick joke as is the rdruid rep lol, both specs are absolutely crazy

SV hunters are at the very least A tier and are in D tier just because almost no one is playing it and not because it’s bad

These types of statistics always are awful to observe, I wish it was somehow not even public info so people could stop being so delusional

3 Likes

I mean, hpal and rsham are better than rdruids in this meta. So if they’re A tier, it’s not unreasonable for rdruid to be B tier

The forums would be so peaceful.

I always had my suspicion, but thank you for confirming for me that you are a dum dum.

because you linked a website mispresenting it, when they state their statistics are based off the leaderboards.

its called analytics, they’re up for interpterion.

Always hunter players that que with healing priests that complain about rdruids ://

Replace any cleave with an rsham over Druid and they’re just better

Maybe not by the end of the season tho

I’m not misrepresenting it

Representation on the leaderboard buddy

These are all the same thing that everyone always talks about nothing has changed, idk how you somehow think anyone is misrepresenting it

Actually just exhausting talking to people like you

Kk

1 Like

Where have I been complaining? Facts are facts, rdruid is insanely strong. If you’re not succeeding as one it is purely user error.

im not going to explain to you again that the website isn’t making any claims but basing their rating system off what players are playing right now.

There is a trend of people playing a class they believe to be strong. And there’s a reason why no one plays MW monk.

Arguing with people like you is extremely exhausting to be honest.

I understand that, my point is just going over your head. It’s because people use this type of data to draw their own conclusions on strength on these forums - in fact you’ve done that yourself to say a comp like turbo isn’t too good, or the rdruid players will say their rep is bad → spec isn’t that insane. I am mocking it, because if you want to look at data on a site like this you can have statistics skewed in favor of an argument that doesn’t show the bigger picture.

Yeah I completely understand how it would be exhausting to argue with someone who understands exactly what you’re saying but is so over your head you think that they’re clueless

3 Likes

again, mispresenting what someone else has said. you are looking for approval by bringing other things up instead of arguing logically.

1 Like