So this is a weird situation. Thanks to finding some enjoyable decks and having a good run, I am sitting at Rank 1 5 stars. And I find myself umming and ahhing about whether to push on for legend or not. This might be an odd choice for some but I have good reason. The last couple of times I went on to legend, I decided (as I likely will this time) to be happy with the acheivement and focus on simply p[laying fun and less competitive decks. However playing more for fun meant losing more, which obviously pushed the deck to fall into the dreaded "dumpster legend" ranks. The problem I found at this point was that when it came to wanting to try and start ranking up again, the point ratio for wins and losses was so ridiculously screwed up that it meant it was close to impossible to rank up once more. For example, a win might grant me 2-4 ranks (in legend), whereas a single loss would drop me around 40-60 ranks! (Not an exaggeration either!)
So I am wondering if this has been fixed yet. At ranks 4 -> 1 I have noticed I have not been paired against a single legend rank player, which leads me to think that perhaps it has been resolved. But I don't want to fell into the trap if it hasn't yet. Anyone know?
But what difference does it make if you're at rank 1 and 5 stars, or legend 4500? Are you worried about people seeing a bad legend rank? Why does that matter?
It all depends on your goal. Do you want to meme in legend or play competitively and go for Legend 1? Wanting both is and should be impossible, unless you find out the metabreaker deck.
But i agree that the amount of gaining/losing ranks seems random most of the time... I won several game that took longer than 10 minutes and lost ranks because of it. Its demoralizing.
Cannot confirm your observation myself. I play Legend all the time and it is true that when you are now around Top 100 Legend Wild (due to the Qualification for the Wild Open) or Top, I dont know, 30 Standard Legend you will barely move with a win.
But apart from the really high Rank Legend, you move quite fast. From my experience, you move with a win at Rank 2000 Legend on average, I think about 150-200 Rank. At Rank 1000 you move about 100 Rank. This is just an average of course. Its all depends on your Opponent's Rank and whether you are on Winstreak and so on. This is at least my experience.
Nevertheless, I can understand why many people want to stay at Rank 1 rather then enter Legend. If you are in the Dumpster, you meet quite "stupid" Decks and nobody really care about winning or losing. There it is just no fun in playing/winning there.
But what difference does it make if you're at rank 1 and 5 stars, or legend 4500? Are you worried about people seeing a bad legend rank? Why does that matter?
The problem isn't to do with appearances (I have been legend rank 20,000 or so one time). It's to do with the difficulty of making any climbing progress at that rank. If I was rank 5, 0 stars, then I know I have to win 25 games to reach approximately 2,000 Legend (give or take, dep[ending on MMR etc). But if I was rank 20,000 legend, then I would likely need to be winning in the region of 100+ games (and not losing a single one in the process) to get anywhere near the same rank.
I don't know why it is (or was) that way or why Blizzard decided it was a good idea. It's just one of those weird things.
It all depends on your goal. Do you want to meme in legend or play competitively and go for Legend 1? Wanting both is and should be impossible, unless you find out the metabreaker deck.
I agree that wanting to climb and meme around is (and should be) an unlikely event - though some do manage it. But if I memed for a bit and then decided to start climbing, I should be able to climb at the same rate (or close to it) at rank 25,000 legend as I would at rank 2,000 legend. But the last time I tried it at the Dumpster Legend ranks, it just wasnt possible. Essentially the problem seems toi be that if you meme for a bit you get punished by never getting the chance that season to climb back up to a competitive rank.
But what difference does it make if you're at rank 1 and 5 stars, or legend 4500? Are you worried about people seeing a bad legend rank? Why does that matter?
The problem isn't to do with appearances (I have been legend rank 20,000 or so one time). It's to do with the difficulty of making any climbing progress at that rank. If I was rank 5, 0 stars, then I know I have to win 25 games to reach approximately 2,000 Legend (give or take, dep[ending on MMR etc). But if I was rank 20,000 legend, then I would likely need to be winning in the region of 100+ games (and not losing a single one in the process) to get anywhere near the same rank.
I don't know why it is (or was) that way or why Blizzard decided it was a good idea. It's just one of those weird things.
Remember that when Legend was made there wasn't a floor. Thus falling to 20,000 would be similar to dropping 20 ranks from rank 5. Now that we don't drop 20 ranks, the fall in legend just looks so much worse than before.
Blizzard seems to be reassessing it's modes and wondering if things need to change. They are currently looking at social elements and Wild. Soon they'll need to look at Legend as well.
The last couple of times I went on to legend, I decided (as I likely will this time) to be happy with the acheivement and focus on simply p[laying fun and less competitive decks.
[...]
The problem I found at this point was that when it came to wanting to try and start ranking up again, the point ratio for wins and losses was so ridiculously screwed up that it meant it was close to impossible to rank up once more.
Well, the problem I find here is that you change your mind about what you want, over a relatively brief amount of time, and then expect things to go as if you didn't.
You are ofc free to change your goal as many times as you want to, but understand that that's a bit of a luxury, and as such carries its own price, sorry about that.
Intricacies of Blizzard's algorithms notwithstanding, IMHO you would be better off making a choice and standing by it... maybe not for life, but at least until end of season. For example, this month you play for fun, next one you play for rank, or something like that.
As far as I know the legend ranks won or lost depends on the relative mmr of the two opponents. I.e. rank 10 loses against rank 1000, the mmr loss for rank 10 and the mmr gain for 1000 is big. So if you lose matchups around your rank or lower, you will lose many mmr points and ranks. If you win against lower ranks than yours, you will gain only a few mmr points.
Furthermore, the rank displays the place of your personal mmr in comparison to other legend players, your progress depends on how far you are away from the bulk ofpeople. If you are very low and not many people will be around your mmr, then gaining mmr points will not add many ranks. But when you come to the mmr region where more people are, gaining more mmr points can shoot you up a good chunk.
Well realistically you have to decide which of the 2 paths you willing to take, you can't be a memer and expect to climb steadily cause usually meme fun decks are not good (Or not good enough to actually climb) for that purpose. So that's the only thing to think about here, not if you push or not to legend (Specially when you're 1 game away)... Cause I mean what's the other option? Losing games until you drop a couple ranks and then climb back to rank 1 to again drop just cause you don't want to get to legend? That doesn't make any sense at all right? Your problem is that if you play a bunch of meme decks and lose a lot then your MMR gets so low that you barely gain ranks when winning on legend... well going up a down between ranks 4-1 isn't better at all right? The only "benefit" is that you only win or lose 1 star for each game so it may feel like more of a win/less of a loss but being real it's just dumb to think that way.
I really don't see a reason to not get to legend like who cares if you only get 2 ranks with every win and then lose 50 with a single loss? Who cares if you are #30k legend? And finally, is it that much better to win just one star and lose just one star after every game? If the answer to this is yes (at which point I would say you kinda have like a confidence issue of some sort) then again, decide, you want to be a memer or climb the ladder and then ask yourself: "How is dropping to rank 5 and climbing back to 1 to then drop again cause I don't want to be on legend a good thing to do? Am I getting something out of this?" I guarantee you that the answer will be, no. So there, question answered, just get to legend and enjoy the game, don't look at your rank that much, it's just a number.
The last couple of times I went on to legend, I decided (as I likely will this time) to be happy with the acheivement and focus on simply p[laying fun and less competitive decks.
[...]
The problem I found at this point was that when it came to wanting to try and start ranking up again, the point ratio for wins and losses was so ridiculously screwed up that it meant it was close to impossible to rank up once more.
Well, the problem I find here is that you change your mind about what you want, over a relatively brief amount of time, and then expect things to go as if you didn't.
You are ofc free to change your goal as many times as you want to, but understand that that's a bit of a luxury, and as such carries its own price, sorry about that.
Intricacies of Blizzard's algorithms notwithstanding, IMHO you would be better off making a choice and standing by it... maybe not for life, but at least until end of season. For example, this month you play for fun, next one you play for rank, or something like that.
Maybe I didn't explain myself very well - I'm not sure why you think what you are saying in the first paragraph. What do you think I expect to go differently? I am saying that if I choose to stay in normal ranking mode while I play whatever I feel like, then at any point I can choose to start playing competitively and move up the ladder with ease. However, as soon as I hit legend, this becomes detrimental to my game play and ability to play the game as expected, since the lower I go in legend, the exponentially harder it becomes to get back to that original point (unlike in normal ranked mode where it is linear.
Well, the problem I find here is that you change your mind about what you want, over a relatively brief amount of time, and then expect things to go as if you didn't.
You are ofc free to change your goal as many times as you want to, but understand that that's a bit of a luxury, and as such carries its own price, sorry about that.
Intricacies of Blizzard's algorithms notwithstanding, IMHO you would be better off making a choice and standing by it... maybe not for life, but at least until end of season. For example, this month you play for fun, next one you play for rank, or something like that.
I don't know. The OP's stance is that we changed regular ladder to counteract this very concept. You are free to meme it up all you want at rank 5 and still have that 25 game path to legend at any point. You have to meme it up for mutliple months to really be punished for not climbing if climbing is a goal of yours.
Thus when you've gone from that and gone to legend, where you can meme yourself into death, it's jarring, and puts the question whether we need something put into Legend.
It reminds me of how Starcraft 2, at the time I played it (WoL) had a top and bottom to each of their tiers, and it took a long bit of additional pressure to jump from the bottom of one area and go to the next. Thus you have room for experimenting and messing around before you fell from, say, gold to silver league.
Legend hasn't been looked into in a long, LONG while. So perhaps it's time to look into it and ask..should we make changes? Blizzard has already did fundamental changes to the main ladder and the tournament system and have signaled they are up to major changes in Wild depending on what the community wants, so asking them to do likewise to Legend IS on the table, especially since they've decoupled ladder from the tournament system.
Not to say that we SHOULD make changes. Just that we SHOULD let go of the "it's how we've been doing it/nothing will change" argument and ask "do we WANT this to stay as is?" Myself as I'm not a legend player and havan't really seen any real debate on the matter I don't have anything to give on it for now (I will of course, eventually). But I think it is time to decide just how Legend, including the 'dumpster' should work.
Losing more ranks from a loss than you gain from a win in low legend should no longer be an issue. As far as I know, it has only been an issue briefly during matchmaking bugs.
There is a hidden matchmaking rating behind your rank, the rank is a mere representation of your spot in the line. This naturally leads to lower rank changes at the far ends of the matchmaking rating spectrum, both at the very top and the very bottom. However, even if you are at the very bottom, you will start to see bigger gains slowly as you win more games. There is no real difference between that and your stars: if you go on a 20-game losing streak from rank 1, you also need 20 more wins to hit legend!
So this is a weird situation.
Thanks to finding some enjoyable decks and having a good run, I am sitting at Rank 1 5 stars.
And I find myself umming and ahhing about whether to push on for legend or not.
This might be an odd choice for some but I have good reason.
The last couple of times I went on to legend, I decided (as I likely will this time) to be happy with the acheivement and focus on simply p[laying fun and less competitive decks.
However playing more for fun meant losing more, which obviously pushed the deck to fall into the dreaded "dumpster legend" ranks. The problem I found at this point was that when it came to wanting to try and start ranking up again, the point ratio for wins and losses was so ridiculously screwed up that it meant it was close to impossible to rank up once more.
For example, a win might grant me 2-4 ranks (in legend), whereas a single loss would drop me around 40-60 ranks! (Not an exaggeration either!)
So I am wondering if this has been fixed yet. At ranks 4 -> 1 I have noticed I have not been paired against a single legend rank player, which leads me to think that perhaps it has been resolved. But I don't want to fell into the trap if it hasn't yet. Anyone know?
But what difference does it make if you're at rank 1 and 5 stars, or legend 4500? Are you worried about people seeing a bad legend rank? Why does that matter?
It all depends on your goal. Do you want to meme in legend or play competitively and go for Legend 1? Wanting both is and should be impossible, unless you find out the metabreaker deck.
But i agree that the amount of gaining/losing ranks seems random most of the time... I won several game that took longer than 10 minutes and lost ranks because of it. Its demoralizing.
Always expect the unexpectable!
Cannot confirm your observation myself. I play Legend all the time and it is true that when you are now around Top 100 Legend Wild (due to the Qualification for the Wild Open) or Top, I dont know, 30 Standard Legend you will barely move with a win.
But apart from the really high Rank Legend, you move quite fast. From my experience, you move with a win at Rank 2000 Legend on average, I think about 150-200 Rank. At Rank 1000 you move about 100 Rank. This is just an average of course. Its all depends on your Opponent's Rank and whether you are on Winstreak and so on. This is at least my experience.
Nevertheless, I can understand why many people want to stay at Rank 1 rather then enter Legend. If you are in the Dumpster, you meet quite "stupid" Decks and nobody really care about winning or losing. There it is just no fun in playing/winning there.
I'm currently in the legend dumpster I will try to climb
The problem isn't to do with appearances (I have been legend rank 20,000 or so one time).
It's to do with the difficulty of making any climbing progress at that rank.
If I was rank 5, 0 stars, then I know I have to win 25 games to reach approximately 2,000 Legend (give or take, dep[ending on MMR etc).
But if I was rank 20,000 legend, then I would likely need to be winning in the region of 100+ games (and not losing a single one in the process) to get anywhere near the same rank.
I don't know why it is (or was) that way or why Blizzard decided it was a good idea. It's just one of those weird things.
I agree that wanting to climb and meme around is (and should be) an unlikely event - though some do manage it.
But if I memed for a bit and then decided to start climbing, I should be able to climb at the same rate (or close to it) at rank 25,000 legend as I would at rank 2,000 legend.
But the last time I tried it at the Dumpster Legend ranks, it just wasnt possible. Essentially the problem seems toi be that if you meme for a bit you get punished by never getting the chance that season to climb back up to a competitive rank.
Remember that when Legend was made there wasn't a floor. Thus falling to 20,000 would be similar to dropping 20 ranks from rank 5. Now that we don't drop 20 ranks, the fall in legend just looks so much worse than before.
Blizzard seems to be reassessing it's modes and wondering if things need to change. They are currently looking at social elements and Wild. Soon they'll need to look at Legend as well.
One does not simply walk into Mordor,
unless they want to be the best they can be.
Well, the problem I find here is that you change your mind about what you want, over a relatively brief amount of time, and then expect things to go as if you didn't.
You are ofc free to change your goal as many times as you want to, but understand that that's a bit of a luxury, and as such carries its own price, sorry about that.
Intricacies of Blizzard's algorithms notwithstanding, IMHO you would be better off making a choice and standing by it... maybe not for life, but at least until end of season. For example, this month you play for fun, next one you play for rank, or something like that.
As far as I know the legend ranks won or lost depends on the relative mmr of the two opponents. I.e. rank 10 loses against rank 1000, the mmr loss for rank 10 and the mmr gain for 1000 is big. So if you lose matchups around your rank or lower, you will lose many mmr points and ranks. If you win against lower ranks than yours, you will gain only a few mmr points.
Furthermore, the rank displays the place of your personal mmr in comparison to other legend players, your progress depends on how far you are away from the bulk ofpeople. If you are very low and not many people will be around your mmr, then gaining mmr points will not add many ranks. But when you come to the mmr region where more people are, gaining more mmr points can shoot you up a good chunk.
Well realistically you have to decide which of the 2 paths you willing to take, you can't be a memer and expect to climb steadily cause usually meme fun decks are not good (Or not good enough to actually climb) for that purpose. So that's the only thing to think about here, not if you push or not to legend (Specially when you're 1 game away)... Cause I mean what's the other option? Losing games until you drop a couple ranks and then climb back to rank 1 to again drop just cause you don't want to get to legend? That doesn't make any sense at all right? Your problem is that if you play a bunch of meme decks and lose a lot then your MMR gets so low that you barely gain ranks when winning on legend... well going up a down between ranks 4-1 isn't better at all right? The only "benefit" is that you only win or lose 1 star for each game so it may feel like more of a win/less of a loss but being real it's just dumb to think that way.
I really don't see a reason to not get to legend like who cares if you only get 2 ranks with every win and then lose 50 with a single loss? Who cares if you are #30k legend? And finally, is it that much better to win just one star and lose just one star after every game? If the answer to this is yes (at which point I would say you kinda have like a confidence issue of some sort) then again, decide, you want to be a memer or climb the ladder and then ask yourself: "How is dropping to rank 5 and climbing back to 1 to then drop again cause I don't want to be on legend a good thing to do? Am I getting something out of this?" I guarantee you that the answer will be, no. So there, question answered, just get to legend and enjoy the game, don't look at your rank that much, it's just a number.
Maybe I didn't explain myself very well - I'm not sure why you think what you are saying in the first paragraph.
What do you think I expect to go differently?
I am saying that if I choose to stay in normal ranking mode while I play whatever I feel like, then at any point I can choose to start playing competitively and move up the ladder with ease. However, as soon as I hit legend, this becomes detrimental to my game play and ability to play the game as expected, since the lower I go in legend, the exponentially harder it becomes to get back to that original point (unlike in normal ranked mode where it is linear.
I don't know. The OP's stance is that we changed regular ladder to counteract this very concept. You are free to meme it up all you want at rank 5 and still have that 25 game path to legend at any point. You have to meme it up for mutliple months to really be punished for not climbing if climbing is a goal of yours.
Thus when you've gone from that and gone to legend, where you can meme yourself into death, it's jarring, and puts the question whether we need something put into Legend.
It reminds me of how Starcraft 2, at the time I played it (WoL) had a top and bottom to each of their tiers, and it took a long bit of additional pressure to jump from the bottom of one area and go to the next. Thus you have room for experimenting and messing around before you fell from, say, gold to silver league.
Legend hasn't been looked into in a long, LONG while. So perhaps it's time to look into it and ask..should we make changes? Blizzard has already did fundamental changes to the main ladder and the tournament system and have signaled they are up to major changes in Wild depending on what the community wants, so asking them to do likewise to Legend IS on the table, especially since they've decoupled ladder from the tournament system.
Not to say that we SHOULD make changes. Just that we SHOULD let go of the "it's how we've been doing it/nothing will change" argument and ask "do we WANT this to stay as is?" Myself as I'm not a legend player and havan't really seen any real debate on the matter I don't have anything to give on it for now (I will of course, eventually). But I think it is time to decide just how Legend, including the 'dumpster' should work.
One does not simply walk into Mordor,
unless they want to be the best they can be.
Losing more ranks from a loss than you gain from a win in low legend should no longer be an issue. As far as I know, it has only been an issue briefly during matchmaking bugs.
There is a hidden matchmaking rating behind your rank, the rank is a mere representation of your spot in the line. This naturally leads to lower rank changes at the far ends of the matchmaking rating spectrum, both at the very top and the very bottom. However, even if you are at the very bottom, you will start to see bigger gains slowly as you win more games. There is no real difference between that and your stars: if you go on a 20-game losing streak from rank 1, you also need 20 more wins to hit legend!
Youtube: https://www.youtube.com/c/OldGuardian
Twitch: http://www.twitch.tv/old_guardian
Twitter: https://twitter.com/Old_GuardianHS
Blog: http://www.kilkku.com/oldguardian/
Just got almost 500 ranks with one win in dumpster^^
Great - so looks like maybe they might have fixed it finally then. :-)