EPT"You're Better Than You Think" thread from Blizz - Page 2
| Forum Index > Hearthstone General |
|
TAMinator
Australia2706 Posts
| ||
|
MrSexington
United States1768 Posts
On September 21 2014 04:06 Zato-1 wrote: With 51% winrate, you'd eventually reach Legend- you can have less than 50% winrate and still hit rank 5. If you have, say, 45% winrate but you manage to get a lot of your wins in a row, the winstreak will make you win stars faster than you lose them, and you could eventually reach rank 5. Yeah, you're right. You just need to be lucky enough to string your wins together at the right time. | ||
|
Came Norrection
Canada168 Posts
On September 21 2014 04:06 Zato-1 wrote: With 51% winrate, you'd eventually reach Legend- you can have less than 50% winrate and still hit rank 5. If you have, say, 45% winrate but you manage to get a lot of your wins in a row, the winstreak will make you win stars faster than you lose them, and you could eventually reach rank 5. You get get legend with a win rate as low as <0.1% is you lose 10 thousand games then win 100 games in a row to get legend. Unless you are talking about rolling averages which you can't model with your example, the above example works for every competitive game. | ||
|
MrSexington
United States1768 Posts
On September 21 2014 08:18 Came Norrection wrote: You get get legend with a win rate as low as <0.1% is you lose 10 thousand games then win 100 games in a row to get legend. Unless you are talking about rolling averages which you can't model with your example, the above example works for every competitive game. Welcome to the conversation, but you're late. :D | ||
|
NotSorry
United States6722 Posts
| ||
|
Cade)Flayer
United Kingdom279 Posts
| ||
|
NewSunshine
United States5938 Posts
| ||
|
jcroisdale
United States1543 Posts
| ||
|
renlynn
United States276 Posts
maybe they shoulda did this for sc2 a few years ago. | ||
|
AndAgain
United States2621 Posts
| ||
|
Solmyr
Poland261 Posts
Am I at this poll as a rank 23 player? Ok I found that I'm not in the poll becouse you must play one game. | ||
|
TAMinator
Australia2706 Posts
On September 21 2014 11:12 NewSunshine wrote: Another big contributor to this lopsidedness is rank 20. A large number of players just farm wins at rank 20, and don't care to ladder as high as they can, so a lot more players are in the bottom ranks than if rank 20 farming wasn't possible. yeah another contributor is that a lot of people simply play a lot more arena as it's right now the only efficient way to get the cards they need/want. | ||
|
NotSorry
United States6722 Posts
On September 21 2014 19:31 TAMinator wrote: yeah another contributor is that a lot of people simply play a lot more arena as it's right now the only efficient way to get the cards they need/want. The lack of rewards really deters a lot of people from playing ladder, I only played it to see if I could make legendary, now that I have I don't see any reason to do so outside of getting rank 20 for a new card back I'll never use. So Arena it is! | ||
|
MarcoBrei
Brazil66 Posts
What happens is that skill has not a preset universal ruler. If you want to be the best of the world, it's kind simple, just beat everyone else. But if you want to be "good", it may be more complicated to match this expectation with others with similar goal. For competitive players there is no point of comparing themselves with "casual" players. But there's also no clear definition about what makes a player a "casual" one. So there's always room to we think we're just bad, even when most of other players could think we are good. An important point here is not about changing YOUR mind about how good you are, but to understand that this game is made of a massive amount of "casual" players (some plays once per week, some play 1h per day), and the game needs those people. For those people, to climb the ladder and have the "feeling" of being bad while actually they are being better than the average is harmful for the game (for example in a case where a "casual" reaches rank 15). In the original post I inserted a question about why Blizzard made a ranking that behaves like this. No one seems to be interested in this question, people just want to deny the statistics. I think that was a misunderstood about the purpose of the topic. | ||
|
Drake
Germany6146 Posts
1. only very basic cards yet 2. not played enough games to get higher 3. are inactive chars just level to lvl 20 for cardback (which is same like 2) so ... its bullshit | ||
|
Cade)Flayer
United Kingdom279 Posts
| ||
|
Solmyr
Poland261 Posts
Maybe this is the problem with hs and this stats. What is the point of playing this game? Fun factor for diffrent personalities is diffrent thing. You can't just say I play for fun. But what is fun to you? Getting new cards? Winning ? making new decks? Bming? Crushing people from your freinds list? Or helping them get better? Working hard and progressing in any way? If hs needs the casuals as MarcoBrei says in his post we should understand what is the fun factor for casual player. I know that people do not like to loose in real or games. And this is almost purly pvp game. So for evry win there is someone that loose. If you are getting only frustration from loosing you will not last long or stay in a game. Maybe people should get something more from playing matches? I think that gold system in this game could be reworked in some way. Or new type of budget ladder where you compete only with budget decks... . | ||
|
Sejanus
Lithuania550 Posts
What also worries is: when players get a lot frustrated from not getting higher ranks they may abandon the game, I am actually glad to get rid of such people, don't see a reason to be worried. Good for them too, if the game becomes all about grinding for the purpose of having a different number next to your name, well, time to get some rest. | ||
|
hzflank
United Kingdom2991 Posts
| ||
|
Kickboxer
Slovenia1308 Posts
| ||
| ||
