$250K World Championship: EU Qual Tournament Rules - Page 2

On May 23 2014 03:23 Capz wrote:
So if some guy guy from Europe dosent manage to get top 16 in Europe, can he still be able to try out get it in NA or Asia server?

If so that fucking sucks dick. WCS all over again.

On May 23 2014 03:23 Capz wrote:
So if some guy guy from Europe dosent manage to get top 16 in Europe, can he still be able to try out get it in NA or Asia server?

If so that fucking sucks dick. WCS all over again.

On May 23 2014 11:06 prodigyHS wrote:


You clearly haven't been near top 16 to make absurd statement like this

On May 23 2014 14:27 Kleinmuuhg wrote:

I have playdd versus nearly all of the well known players from europe on ladder and won my fair share. No i havent been Top 50 or so yet, as i have limited Time to play , hence my Statement. Dont Know why you would call it an absurd Statement. In legend you will never See 70% win percentages so a lot of it boils down to njmber of games

On May 23 2014 16:12 S_SienZ wrote:

Pretty sure Tides has mentioned that you need 75% winrate to maintain rank 1. And he did stay at the top of NA for quite a while that season.

On May 23 2014 16:25 Kleinmuuhg wrote:

Rank 1 in legend that is, you mean? I really dont think so. You can watch top legend streamers, they wont win 3/4 games, you can watch Trump talk about winrates , he will say that a very good deck has like 60% etc etc. Maybe if you are ahead of the meta or play a perfect counter deck to the currently most played decks you can get 75% for a short ammount of time, but surely not in the long run, not from rank 2 upwards.

On May 23 2014 16:36 S_SienZ wrote:

Yes. And he showed it, especially when MMRs are close. Every loss he incurred and dropped to 2/3, he had to win 3 more games to get back to 1.

No disrespect to Trump, but I've never seen him in the top 20 before. And yes, I acknowledge that being ahead of the meta is very important in getting and maintaining top 10 rank. Kolento has shown this time and again.

Also I recall an interview from I believe it was one of the earlier Fight Nights, where Strifecro was talking about the beta seasons where he was rank 1 Legend in. He mentioned that he was close with Savjz for Rank 1, then all of a sudden he went on like a 40+ win streak or something stupid like that and since then he knew in advance there was no way Savjz would catch up in the final week of the season.

On May 23 2014 16:45 Kleinmuuhg wrote:

Well I cant argue with that I guess.
My original point was though that I personally have a good record, even vs top legend players (on EU) and the only reason I think I wont make it to Top16 is limited time, which really annoys me. Obviously you dont have to believe me and its always hard to prove yourself if you're some anonymous dude, but the end of this year I will have more time and will aim to proving myself worthy of my claims

On May 23 2014 03:49 Heyoka wrote:
TIME TO STRIKE BACK, BOYS

On May 23 2014 17:04 S_SienZ wrote:

No reason for me to not believe you either, it's not like it affects me whatsoever

I just think Top 16 is definitely a pretty tough feat. Totally different ballgame compared to just getting into legend. Especially with 250k now on the line, I don't think many will even stream their progress in the final week.

Good luck when you do go for it.

On May 23 2014 17:07 Boonbag wrote:


lmao
then a korean player proceeds to win the whole thing

hahahaha

On May 23 2014 17:12 TAMinator wrote:

out of nowhere $o$ wins the HS tournament

On May 23 2014 18:22 Nekovivie wrote:
Isn't top 16 a bit vague though - I thought people got to like top 20 or so then just went idle for the rest of the season, making it extremely difficult for anyone else to break into it?

On May 23 2014 19:46 morningrise wrote:


How is it vague?
Not sure if I understand you correctly, are you implying that the top 16 players are idling or that there's another wall of players before them from 17-50 or so that is idling as well? The former is probably the case for a lot of players if they get a good streak early on and can set themselves way ahead (in which case they still earned it though, didn't they?), but the latter wouldn't really make sense.
If tons of people were actually idling in the top 100, don't you think it'd be even harder to get into top 16 if those people actually would've tried to push further and a few of them made it into top 16 themselves? As a player trying to get into top 16, you'll need to push above at least the former rank 16 either way, doesn't matter too much how many players are between that and your rank and what they are doing, only how many wins that 16 is from your rank at that point.



Concerning the win rates/time commitment stuff:
Sure, going 60:40 with a deck over a large number of games is pretty damn good and will keep you climbing consistently for quite a while. Once you approach around rank 50 it gradually gets a lot harder though, the gain in ranks per win gets smaller to the point were you may need to go 4:0 to push from rank 3 to 2 for example.
To really push for a "safe" top 16 finish you'll need to get into at least top 10 by now since almost everyone in the top 100 or so who have a realistic shot will go for a final push towards the last few days and at least some of these are bound to make it.
And to get from around 30-40 (the point were you start going from 10+ ranks per win to <2-3 ranks per win and about twice as much in the negative per loss) into top 10, you really need to go on a ridiculous streak, 60% win rate won't do it anymore at this point. You'll need to go about 2:1 to break even (even more once you're actually in the top 10 or so) and only the wins beyond that will actually push you onwards by a few ranks at a time.
So even with a ~75% win rate, you'll need to play a good number of games maintaining that rate (probably around 60 to push from 50 to 10) which is extremely hard to do. Basically, there's still a huge difference in games needing to be played based on how good your streak actually is, e.g. starting at 50 and going 45:15 will be about the same as going 35:10 or 15:0. I think most players who are in the top16 actually had a streak closer to 85%+ win rate for their last 10-20 games. Which really is something you need to get lucky with, no matter how skilled you are or how good your deck is.

And that's the point were time commitment comes in. Say you're a player who consistently makes it into top 100 at least and can maintain your rank somewhere in there... you'll still need that one big streak to really push for top 16 and having more time at your disposal definitely improves your odds of getting that streak you need.

On May 24 2014 00:55 Nekovivie wrote:


Well don't get me wrong. I'm not saying the ladder is corrupt, but I remember reading topics on here about how high ranked players would "sit" on their rank once they broke high MMR.

Since you seem to lose a lot more MMR from a loss and you gain from a win, this made ousting these players from the top of the ladder extremely difficult, even for top caliber players who hold 80% win rate.

Since Blizzard are picking the top 16 from each season, isn't the motivation for people to sit on their rank even greater?