What Does Rank Mean?

Play Mode Discussion
Prev 1 2 3 5 Next
02/11/2019 09:36 AMPosted by jawsofwar
02/11/2019 09:31 AMPosted by Whoopya
Rank dosen't mean !@#$.

Sure you can make mistakes here and there but as long as you're 55% win rate with any deck you WILL climb, 'cause it's just a grind. No skill involved whatsoever.


If that were true then why do so many not make it to rank5?


'cause they don't play enough ? Seriously, how many games a day you think you'd win because of your skill and not because of your deck ?
02/11/2019 10:50 AMPosted by Lykotic
02/11/2019 09:31 AMPosted by Whoopya
Rank dosen't mean !@#$.

Sure you can make mistakes here and there but as long as you're 55% win rate with any deck you WILL climb, 'cause it's just a grind. No skill involved whatsoever.

Since the average winrate with the top decks in the Standard meta are usuallya round 52% that would mean you're producing 3% above the average person in your example ;)


I don't know where the 52% comes from but when I play meta decks I tend to average exactly as it's predicted on hsreplay (between 55 to 60% for most meta decks). Even with a 52% win rate someone can potentially climb though, just need a humongous amount of games.
02/11/2019 09:31 AMPosted by Whoopya
Rank dosen't mean !@#$.

Sure you can make mistakes here and there but as long as you're 55% win rate with any deck you WILL climb, 'cause it's just a grind. No skill involved whatsoever.
What does this even mean? Do you realize you're begging the question?

"ELO doesn't mean anything. Skill doesn't matter in chess. As long as you maintain a 55% win rate you WILL climb."

What exactly do you think causes a player to maintain a positive win rate at high ranks?
02/11/2019 11:31 AMPosted by Whoopya
<span class="truncated">...</span>

If that were true then why do so many not make it to rank5?


'cause they don't play enough ? Seriously, how many games a day you think you'd win because of your skill and not because of your deck ?


Only takes me a couple days to get to rank 5 at most..
02/11/2019 09:36 AMPosted by jawsofwar
02/11/2019 09:31 AMPosted by Whoopya
Rank dosen't mean !@#$.

Sure you can make mistakes here and there but as long as you're 55% win rate with any deck you WILL climb, 'cause it's just a grind. No skill involved whatsoever.


If that were true then why do so many not make it to rank5?


Because this game is not fun enough to deserve more than one hour a week.
truth

if you are below rank 5, its not your collection, not your deck, thats hindering you , its you

You dont need a tier 1 deck, to get rank 5, even a solid homebrew deck, that respects the basic of deckbuilding gets to rank 5

You are likely making horrendous misplays ( without understanding, that you misplayed, which is part of it)

You have no good understanding, of the different decks that are around

Take this with a grain of salt, if you really dont play a lot ( though once you hit rank 5 or higher, it takes like 2 hours/ month to always stay at rank 5)

Or you really just started a new account
02/11/2019 09:05 AMPosted by Kuruption
Your rank pretty much just shows how much you play the game and how much of a collection you have with some skill sprinkled in.
02/11/2019 10:52 AMPosted by SuperLegend
rank is 'how much u play meter'
excuses, excuses...you can be legend every month by playing 21-40 games (=what you play to do dailies)
02/11/2019 12:58 PMPosted by azweik
if you are below rank 5, its not your collection, not your deck, thats hindering you , its you

You dont need a tier 1 deck, to get rank 5, even a solid homebrew deck, that respects the basic of deckbuilding gets to rank 5

You are likely making horrendous misplays ( without understanding, that you misplayed, which is part of it)

You have no good understanding, of the different decks that are around
exactly
02/11/2019 12:58 PMPosted by azweik
Take this with a grain of salt, if you really dont play a lot ( though once you hit rank 5 or higher, it takes like 2 hours/ month to always stay at rank 5)
same goes for any rank since we lose 4 ranks a month (nvm 9 to 5 is faster than 4 to legend because of the winstreak bonus)
02/11/2019 11:34 AMPosted by Whoopya
02/11/2019 10:50 AMPosted by Lykotic
...
Since the average winrate with the top decks in the Standard meta are usuallya round 52% that would mean you're producing 3% above the average person in your example ;)


I don't know where the 52% comes from but when I play meta decks I tend to average exactly as it's predicted on hsreplay (between 55 to 60% for most meta decks). Even with a 52% win rate someone can potentially climb though, just need a humongous amount of games.

Vicious Syndicate meta reports:
https://www.vicioussyndicate.com/

When Blizzard has released their meta data on decks it has be VERY close to Vs' data (within 2%) whereas HSR has proven in these comparisons to be inflated. I tend to use HSR for deck building ideas and card WR information but Vs for meta information as they've had a better track record.

As for you averaging exactly what it says... awesome, heh. I tend to overperform with Control and Midrange, perform near point with Combo and underperform with Aggro. Just my experience with how I am compared to the overall data =)

Posted by azweik
Take this with a grain of salt, if you really dont play a lot ( though once you hit rank 5 or higher, it takes like 2 hours/ month to always stay at rank 5)
same goes for any rank since we lose 4 ranks a month (nvm 9 to 5 is faster than 4 to legend because of the winstreak bonus)

With the latest changes I would assume we'll eventually see a lot of herding at rank 10.... but who knows ./shrug
02/11/2019 07:39 AMPosted by Wardrum
The thing is, Combo has been getting more and more consistent for a year or so now. Clone Priest is quite strong, Holy Wrath Paladin was wrecking things regularly before its early board wipe got nerfed and so on.

The game being "OTK your opponent or rush them down super fast before they can" simply isn't that interesting because it feels like the same thing every time.
Bingo.
Been barfing this on the forums for at least the last month or three.
OTK's are cool / respected IF they have a high-bar. Devs...do you see the difference between a meta OTK and a non-meta OTK? non-meta OTK's are more-card involving, more-board-state-dependent, more draw-RNG-dependent, more-creative, unseen, and thus way better.

Meta OTK's, like the top-5 OTK's you'd think of off the top of your head, are not hard to set up that's the problem.

Emperor Thaurissan should be a mandatory OTK piece imo.
If a combo is so-strong it will always OTK your opponent down, it absolutely should require draw this whole combo + emperor, don't burn cards, and successfully live long enough to discount these exact cards. That's called a high-bar.

Alternatively, OTK's like old Freeze Mage had super-limited reach.
So if you put some mid-game threat's down, like 2, that OTK deck is in trouble...as it really doesn't want to ice-lance or FB your guy. That puts the skill on that OTK player.

So devs OTK's are cool IF they take-real-setup. More setup than this BS.

Example: Mechatun Warlock? Gross, it discounts 2 cards...so draw 5 cards, play 2 of them, cast Boom n Cata. Gratz. 5-card combo, to OTK, in a class with lifesteal n tap.

Maly-Rogue: Skill-intensive, because you cannot afford to use any damage for removal, so you rely on your vanishes. It has too-much reach bc what 5 Maly's is like normally-possible so it's like what 80ish face-damage from hand? That seems a bit too strong, but at least the deck is skill-intensive in that it cannot afford to burn a card. This is exactly why Coldlight Oracle should be in standard, and not in just-wild where its left targetable for Shadowstep.

The deck I only-played once DK Rexxar / Egg Hunter became front-page Meta (May 2018 w CTA nerf) was 10-cards, 40 some mana, board-state dependent, sequencing, and it was flasy/cool/suuuuper inconsistent. That's what you want out of OTK's..although semi-consistent wouldn't hurt instead of losing 49/50 matches to pull it off. if your deck end up on Hearthpwn's front page / even in the search results with any amt of upvotes its time to peace out from that deck otherwise you'll be playing expected which is exactly the reason to not play hearthstone bc you want to play unexpected that's what fun grows from with H20.

Still winning 1/50 was more-my-style than winning enough to legend with some meta DK Rex deck or so everyone expects. How anyone can play meta, change 2 4 cards and think the deck is now theirs is beyond me. You can't split a metadeck's core in 1/2 and combine it with some other meta deck's 1/2 core, because neither core is complete so the deck wont do anything synergistic or consistently enough to win. You have full core or no core, not 1/2. So like you cant take WBP and like...res up yetis instead of the big-8-box outs, or drop servitude and rely on res n essence, it's just not strong enough.
I like to think of the ladder like running a 10k.

First, do it because you enjoy it. Second, do you enjoy the competition of getting a better time from one race to the next (better rank from one month to the next). Finally, do you race to have fun and finish, or is the rank and reward important to you.

These questions should answer how much effort you put into ‘running’ the ladder.
A high rank tells me that a person is skilled, plays good decks, and plays actively. If you aren’t ranking up, you are missing one of those three components.
The attitude of

02/11/2019 07:22 AMPosted by Gwyneth
"You have to be at X rank for your opinion to matter."


Is kind of nonsense since most players aren't top legend players so if any opinion matters for the game to be healthy it would be the some kind of inclusionary consensus.

At the same time when the context is how broken a deck is or if it's uncounterable and unbeatable, then there usually is a correlation between experience and rank and how informed that opinion is. Someone who can navigate to Legend is on average more likely to be more informed about the strengths and weaknesses of decks and have a more complete picture of the state of the game.

As far as combo decks, i think it's even the opinion of also many high legend players that they are a bit to easy to get off compared to traditional powerlevel of most combo decks of the past relative to their meta and also are easier to play like cloning gallery priest. I know Feno for instance which is a combo lover hates the current meta due to how "mindless" it is to pull off so i think rank 18 or not your sentiment kind of echoes what most people are fed up with.

02/11/2019 10:52 AMPosted by SuperLegend
rank is 'how much u play meter'


No that's how many games you play. You can have 2 players playing 250 games from rank 10 and one reaching rank 5 and another reaching legend. So number of games doesn't equate to ranks simply cause winrate percentage is a variable.
02/11/2019 09:31 AMPosted by Whoopya
but as long as you're 55% win rate

02/11/2019 09:31 AMPosted by Whoopya
No skill involved whatsoever.


(Kratos Voice): BOY.
What Does Rank Mean?

How high the rank can to be a better player would be there. A better player means:

1 - More lucky player;

2 - More cards unlocked to him/her;

3 - More free time;

4 - Capacity in identify the opponent's strategy;

5 - Good in to counter the opponent's treats or strategies;

6 - Good in to pilot netdecks;

7 - Good in to build homebrew decks.

If you don't have the 2 - your 5 -, 6 - and 7 - are worse.
Rank means consistency to me personally

In lower ranks the games play out a bit differently, the openings aren’t optimal most of the time because the players aren’t mulliganing for their best opening.

In higher ranks players know the matchups a bit better and mulligan accordingly
The games tend to play out in a fashion that what you would think they will
Ie against a Hunter I’m expecting a Spellstone on 6
Or a 1 drop into 2 drop into animal companion. Instead of hoping they do t have it. I expect it and mulligan accordingly

It’s a little hard to explain but
02/11/2019 07:30 AMPosted by Pißwasser
It's a game. Instead of the rank, fun should be priority.

You should running for the president. I'll vote for yah.
There seem to be 2 questions.

First: I do think that it would be better if there were less ways to cheat out minions and the game was more focussed on playing them normally so that your opponent can interact with it. That being said I am also not a big fan of you either have the answer (e.g. Hex for Malygos) or you lose.

Second: I think the idea behind rank and voicing your opinion is that if you are at a low rank you can just play better to win and don't need balance changes since there is a lot of room for improvement. In many games a better player can win regardless of balance. Thus balance only mattering for high tier play.

However, the above mostly applies to win rate (as to my understanding). So for playing experience card design matters at all ranks.

In summary:
This card is OP --> only high rank/level play
This cars is no fun --> all ranks
02/11/2019 05:59 PMPosted by xFoobs
Rank means consistency to me personally

In lower ranks the games play out a bit differently, the openings aren’t optimal most of the time because the players aren’t mulliganing for their best opening.

In higher ranks players know the matchups a bit better and mulligan accordingly
The games tend to play out in a fashion that what you would think they will
Ie against a Hunter I’m expecting a Spellstone on 6
Or a 1 drop into 2 drop into animal companion. Instead of hoping they do t have it. I expect it and mulligan accordingly

It’s a little hard to explain but


Ok "Higher ranks will "know" the matchups, They can "assume" a match up as they are aware of the meta decks. As per your example you mulligan accordingly and say you do not receive your ideal cards to deal with the 1 drop into razormaw, into animal companion then in basically 2-3 turns you,ve already lost the game which then creates an artificial winrate based upon how well the cards drew.

This sort of winrate can be demonstrated by having 1 card which says "Win this game" and then placing it in your deck and once draw you win, If you play enough games this will at some point in the match history create a so called balance point where a 50% win rate will naturally occur, So if we assume a 50% winrate is a given that means you will only have a 5-10% effect on the effectiveness of your deck because most meta decks are almost self piloting and predictable so you basically know whats going to be played on what turn.

What I mean by self piloting is that a hunter will not play a Dire Mole into Razormaw, Into animal companion if they draw them.
I normally finish between rank 4 and legend, and this is largely helped by the small rank resets every month. The climb to rank 5 is either fairly small or non existent, and I can spend most of the month playing decks that I enjoy (or just not ladder at all) rather than grind ranks with the current boogeyman. The amount that ill really try to push for legend is determined by how much I'm enjoying the meta. There are plenty of really good players who just chill at all of the rank floors and don't care about tryharding, focusing instead on memes and homebrews. I personally like to find decks that are semi- competitive and counter whatever is most popular- I'm having fun with Big Spell Mage right now (Toki MVP, geist a close second lol), occasionally playing SMOrc mage when fatigue matches get old.

Ive found HSReplay to be massively helpful in improving my play, as well as watching a fair number of streamers over the last year or two.
@Gwyneth

Take what most say on this forum with a grain of salt. Rank 5 is something on the order of the top 5% of players. That's a very small number of people compared to the whole.

Yet you would think it's the top 50% based on how many people here swear they all hit it. Reality doesnt line up. To put it plainly...a fairly good number of people here that say they are rank 5 and have better opinions than you haven't left the free ranks.

For me, ladder just isnt fun. Oh it starts out very fun. But around 15 you just drown in the same handful of games over and over again. And some metas (like this one) are just agonizing to sludge through. 20 minute games that dont fit into my windows of play and arent fun besides.

Your opinions matter. Rank measures time infinitely more than skill (but does not exclude skill). And yes, all this mana cheating has burned most of us out. No one cares how fair maly rogue is. We've had a full year of "30 voidlords starting from turn 5" and "summon velen and maly and insta kill you directly from deck" and "I summon oakheart into all things!"

It's okay to be desperate for rotation.

Join the Conversation

Return to Forum