Average player could not get Legend regardless how many hours will he play or what deck he will use.
And yet, based off of some of the comments on this thread there certainly seem to be a fair amount of average players who are apparently hitting legend. Go figure. ^_^
I want to read abour your accomplishments in Hearthstone, really.
That's nice. Apparently it's not too dissimilar to your average Hearthstone player's. XD
Average player could not get Legend regardless how many hours will he play or what deck he will use.
And yet, based off of some of the comments on this thread there certainly seem to be a fair amount of average players who are apparently hitting legend. Go figure. ^_^
Just define "average" or "bad" player.
I mean, if you play a Pirate Warrior on the ladder how on earth can you even play BAD?! It is almost impossible! The deck plays itself.
It's apparently not that hard to play pirate warrior badly, I see a shitload of bad plays while laddering. It's usually lack of understanding about how to play different matchups that's the problem. Aggro vs aggro being pretty much an all-out board control game seems to be especially hard to grasp.
Yesterday I had a pirate warrior trade into my azure drake (while playing miracle) with his 7/3 arcanite reaper. I was at 23 health, he just shy of 30 and drake was the only minion on board. No burn was used whatsoever on his part up to this point. You'd think a monkey would understand to go face in this situation, but apparently not. This was at rank 3.
Average player could not get Legend regardless how many hours will he play or what deck he will use.
And yet, based off of some of the comments on this thread there certainly seem to be a fair amount of average players who are apparently hitting legend. Go figure. ^_^
Just define "average" or "bad" player.
I mean, if you play a Pirate Warrior on the ladder how on earth can you even play BAD?! It is almost impossible! The deck plays itself.
Believe me, it's possible. You should play a little around ~10 rank at end of the season and you will see it by yourself.
Average player could not get Legend regardless how many hours will he play or what deck he will use.
And yet, based off of some of the comments on this thread there certainly seem to be a fair amount of average players who are apparently hitting legend. Go figure. ^_^
Just define "average" or "bad" player.
I mean, if you play a Pirate Warrior on the ladder how on earth can you even play BAD?! It is almost impossible! The deck plays itself.
It's apparently not that hard to play pirate warrior badly, I see a shitload of bad plays while laddering. It's usually lack of understanding about how to play different matchups that's the problem. Aggro vs aggro being pretty much an all-out board control game seems to be especially hard to grasp.
Yesterday I had a pirate warrior trade into my azure drake (while playing miracle) with his 7/3 arcanite reaper. I was at 23 health, he just shy of 30 and drake was the only minion on board. No burn was used whatsoever on his part up to this point. You'd think a monkey would understand to go face in this situation, but apparently not. This was at rank 3.
Rank 3! So just a few step ahead on hitting legend! It seems that this "bad" Pirate Warrior player was anyway headed to Legend. And I agree, that was indeed a bad play.
I've always believed that skill is needed in this game as much as (if not more) the need for positive luck when the RnG kicks in at times. Though I do also believe that a considerable time investment is also required to steadily climb the ranks to legend within a single month.
Skill itself is an interesting and ambiguous term as everyone has different connotations of what constitutes skill and what level they are in different decision making abilities. Skill can govern everything from knowing what cards to include in a deck, what makes a good trade and when, when to go face or minion. All those and more contribute to a person's skill. You could be amazing in some areas and suck in others. That's human nature and pretty normal.
But all of the above can be skuppered with the sheer randomness of the game at times. Which is something that will always frustrate even the most skilled player.
I think it's time and skill, people's egos would like to believe that only it's a time-issue, whereas not everyone could achieve an over 50% winrate against the top 2% of players (when you're past rank 5), of course time plays a role in the end. I think skills matters a lot, I'm a rank 5 player and I'm still making a decent amount of mistakes, not playing focused etc. and my opponents are doing the same, though the higher you play the less free wins you get, there are differences between rank 15-10-5 and I assume legend. Some of you are thinking that they play near perfect/perfect, maybe you're just blind to the mistakes you make, just like the noobs you crush at rank 20/16, they probably think they play well. It's just more pleasant to blame a low rank due to a lack of time rather than a lack of skill.
The ego issue can also be easily reversed; Legend people's egos would like to believe that reaching Legend it's mostly skills.
OFC it is neither 100% only skills or 100% only time; I would put the ratio at 75% time 25% skills. Not counting how much of that 25% skills involves RNG! And that's why time is mostly important: variance is kinda nullified by nr. of games played. Ergo, Time > Skills.
That kind of depends on how you look at it. If you have 51-55% winrate on your way to legend, then yes, I would say that it was greatly because of time that you eventually got legend. But there are quite a few players that have a winrate well above that. I, for instance, had a 67% winrate to legend last season. I'm guessing that it took me a bit less than 150 games. With an average of 6 minutes per game, that's 15 hours of gameplay in a month. Was it really 75% time that took me to legend? I think most people can spare 15 hours in a month.
I think it's mostly time but between rank 15 player one that fight all month to get there and a Legend player the difference is not only time but huge skill wall as well. I have friends who play the game since beta and the best that they ever reach is rank 10. On the other hand I play from 1 year and finally hit legend in December however I hit rank 5 every month since May 2016. Time is a huge factor if you can reach rank 5. But if you can't then you are lacking skill as well. What a player able to reach legend do that normal players don't. They track there games, they know what they are facing each game, they know there deck inside out, they know what outs they have and what is there game plan. Legend players know why there win rate is going down, they know when to switch decks, they know there opponent deck and know around what cards to play. Legend players know what mulligan mean and mulligan for there best opening for example dropping Tunnel Trog on turn 1 against RenoLock is great play but is disaster play against warrior or rogue. Legend players know that. Legend players trade optimally for example with rogue on turn 2 they attack STB not Patch the pirate. Overall there is a lot of skill but time is also a factor it took me 277 games to reach legend last month and will probably took me more this month as my winrate is 2% lower.
That kind of depends on how you look at it. If you have 51-55% winrate on your way to legend, then yes, I would say that it was greatly because of time that you eventually got legend. But there are quite a few players that have a winrate well above that. I, for instance, had a 67% winrate to legend last season. I'm guessing that it took me a bit less than 150 games. With an average of 6 minutes per game, that's 15 hours of gameplay in a month. Was it really 75% time that took me to legend? I think most people can spare 15 hours in a month.
What if you dont play cancer decks? Destined to not hitting legend?
Well what is a "cancer deck" to you? Aggro? Meta decks? I used miracle rogue from 5 to legend. But if you use "fun" decks, it's gonna be pretty damn hard to get to legend nowadays.
In addition, one thing I originally failed to consider was that a lot of times I find myself being forced to play decks that I normally wouldn't want to (be it Rogue or Deathrattles or whatever) to complete quests for gold.
This in fact was the only reason I played a Warrior Pirate deck recently - because I had to win 3 warrior games and warriors are naturally less fun for me to play as - and so it also meant losing more games than I would normally, simply by virtue of the deck thrown together hastily just to complete the quest wins.
Truth be told, I value getting gold for more packs more than worrying about trying to get to Legend which becomes a little pointless after the monthly reset.
I think I've seen just about every deck (barring the old Priest ones) being called a "Cancer Deck" by somebody at some time or other. The worst ones were the old Miracle Rogue and HandLock decks which were stupidly overpowered.
Pirates and Jade are currently too strong in my opinion. Though PW is easily countered by most Reno decks (which have a hard time against Jade)
That kind of depends on how you look at it. If you have 51-55% winrate on your way to legend, then yes, I would say that it was greatly because of time that you eventually got legend. But there are quite a few players that have a winrate well above that. I, for instance, had a 67% winrate to legend last season. I'm guessing that it took me a bit less than 150 games. With an average of 6 minutes per game, that's 15 hours of gameplay in a month. Was it really 75% time that took me to legend? I think most people can spare 15 hours in a month.
What if you dont play cancer decks? Destined to not hitting legend?
Well what is a "cancer deck" to you? Aggro? Meta decks? I used miracle rogue from 5 to legend. But if you use "fun" decks, it's gonna be pretty damn hard to get to legend nowadays.
Cancer is Pirate aggro decks. Playing with my jaina was though these days against Pwarrior at every single rank. U get a winstreak and get a PWarrior on ur way, get crushed, close hs. Forget abt ladder, play adventures VoHiYo.
Well tbh you have a much better matchup against aggro decks with reno mage than I do with miracle rogue. If you're struggling with pirate warrior in particular, you should try to find the cause and try to adapt to playing the matchup differently. Maybe your list is too greedy, maybe you mulligan incorrectly? I don't know. Or are you playing tempo mage or something? In that case I can understand why you're getting tucked by pirate decks.
There is definitely a much bigger random component in this game than compared to games such as MtG, WoW TCG, etc.
I imagine this is partly why they chose to make it a digital game rather than solid cards (that and the licensing issues with Wizards of the Coast who own the monopoly on CCGs).
I suppose it does add an element of equalisation (to bypass skill levels) to a degree - essentially, you can luck out every draw with an answer and every ping to the right minion, etc. But that will only get you a win now and then. And that's where good decision making skills and game knowledge take over and come into play.
Time is an issue along with skill and randomness. I hit rank 5 every month.....I have been legend, so don't have the desire to grind it again. There are days when I can't lose, because RNG gods are with me and matchups are great. There are days I can't win because RNG gods are against me and matchups are horrible.
Yesterday was a bad day. Lost 2 ranks. Today will be better and I'll climb 2 ranks, but then due to time, I'll stop. So, it's all related, but having skill allows you to beat bad odds and bad matchups occasionally making the time needed less. I know I'm a very good player, but not a great player. Part of that is I'm always watching TV while I play, so I make mistakes here and there. If I focused on the game, I'm sure I could do better, but still most days an hour is all I get and some days none at all. You do need time.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
There are 3 kinds of people in the world. Those that can count and those that can't.
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Hall of Fame (ignore list): aleathas, Baylith, cendol, DiamondDM13, Dominieq, doomr, glitterprincess, hamtarofr, Heck, Jwigg33, Kaladin, Krewger, Legend_Entomber, libertyprime, Maukiepaukie, PandarenHero, randjob, s2mikey, SchruteBucks, The_Giratina, TheWamts, ticandtac, tictactucroc, tsudecimo, WaffleMonstr
I've always believed that skill is needed in this game as much as (if not more) the need for positive luck when the RnG kicks in at times.
Though I do also believe that a considerable time investment is also required to steadily climb the ranks to legend within a single month.
Skill itself is an interesting and ambiguous term as everyone has different connotations of what constitutes skill and what level they are in different decision making abilities.
Skill can govern everything from knowing what cards to include in a deck, what makes a good trade and when, when to go face or minion. All those and more contribute to a person's skill. You could be amazing in some areas and suck in others. That's human nature and pretty normal.
But all of the above can be skuppered with the sheer randomness of the game at times. Which is something that will always frustrate even the most skilled player.
http://www.hearthpwn.com/forums/hearthstone-general/general-discussion/184339-the-difference-between-skill-floor-and-skill-gap
Time + skill + luck :D
That kind of depends on how you look at it. If you have 51-55% winrate on your way to legend, then yes, I would say that it was greatly because of time that you eventually got legend. But there are quite a few players that have a winrate well above that. I, for instance, had a 67% winrate to legend last season. I'm guessing that it took me a bit less than 150 games. With an average of 6 minutes per game, that's 15 hours of gameplay in a month. Was it really 75% time that took me to legend? I think most people can spare 15 hours in a month.
I think it's mostly time but between rank 15 player one that fight all month to get there and a Legend player the difference is not only time but huge skill wall as well. I have friends who play the game since beta and the best that they ever reach is rank 10. On the other hand I play from 1 year and finally hit legend in December however I hit rank 5 every month since May 2016. Time is a huge factor if you can reach rank 5. But if you can't then you are lacking skill as well. What a player able to reach legend do that normal players don't. They track there games, they know what they are facing each game, they know there deck inside out, they know what outs they have and what is there game plan. Legend players know why there win rate is going down, they know when to switch decks, they know there opponent deck and know around what cards to play. Legend players know what mulligan mean and mulligan for there best opening for example dropping Tunnel Trog on turn 1 against RenoLock is great play but is disaster play against warrior or rogue. Legend players know that. Legend players trade optimally for example with rogue on turn 2 they attack STB not Patch the pirate. Overall there is a lot of skill but time is also a factor it took me 277 games to reach legend last month and will probably took me more this month as my winrate is 2% lower.
In addition, one thing I originally failed to consider was that a lot of times I find myself being forced to play decks that I normally wouldn't want to (be it Rogue or Deathrattles or whatever) to complete quests for gold.
This in fact was the only reason I played a Warrior Pirate deck recently - because I had to win 3 warrior games and warriors are naturally less fun for me to play as - and so it also meant losing more games than I would normally, simply by virtue of the deck thrown together hastily just to complete the quest wins.
Truth be told, I value getting gold for more packs more than worrying about trying to get to Legend which becomes a little pointless after the monthly reset.
A good example was a deck I played yesterday, consisting of virtually every Divine Shield minion I own! Heh!
I wasn't playing to win - just playing to get those minions out as fast as humanly possible for my 50 goldz! XD
I think I've seen just about every deck (barring the old Priest ones) being called a "Cancer Deck" by somebody at some time or other.
The worst ones were the old Miracle Rogue and HandLock decks which were stupidly overpowered.
Pirates and Jade are currently too strong in my opinion. Though PW is easily countered by most Reno decks (which have a hard time against Jade)
There is definitely a much bigger random component in this game than compared to games such as MtG, WoW TCG, etc.
I imagine this is partly why they chose to make it a digital game rather than solid cards (that and the licensing issues with Wizards of the Coast who own the monopoly on CCGs).
I suppose it does add an element of equalisation (to bypass skill levels) to a degree - essentially, you can luck out every draw with an answer and every ping to the right minion, etc.
But that will only get you a win now and then. And that's where good decision making skills and game knowledge take over and come into play.
agreed, just like even more so in games like poker.
Time is an issue along with skill and randomness. I hit rank 5 every month.....I have been legend, so don't have the desire to grind it again. There are days when I can't lose, because RNG gods are with me and matchups are great. There are days I can't win because RNG gods are against me and matchups are horrible.
Yesterday was a bad day. Lost 2 ranks. Today will be better and I'll climb 2 ranks, but then due to time, I'll stop. So, it's all related, but having skill allows you to beat bad odds and bad matchups occasionally making the time needed less. I know I'm a very good player, but not a great player. Part of that is I'm always watching TV while I play, so I make mistakes here and there. If I focused on the game, I'm sure I could do better, but still most days an hour is all I get and some days none at all. You do need time.
There are 3 kinds of people in the world. Those that can count and those that can't.