Curious as to how much you spent / if you're paying someone to play for you to achieve pro rank in gwent every season for the first 3 seasons you picked it up, lol. I'm multi legend consistent rank 3 plus every season I play ranked and I had difficulty getting past rank 17-16 when I started playing gwent. I actually still haven't gotten past 16 bc I stopped playing it. So I'm a little skeptical that you apparently just picked it up and immediately became one of the best players in the game for 3 seasons straight. I mean if you were a pro sure, but you're just some guy that took 4 years to hit legend 3 times. I'm not buying it.
Well gwent doesn't have nearly as high of a player population so making it within the top 1000 players isn't that big of an achievement but i did it. I probably have spent a fair amount of money but more importantly time on both hearthstone and gwent so i could build decks that can compete at high ranks.
Yeah again, from my experience it's not that anywhere near that easy to get to pro rank in Gwent. I feel like you're trying to prove a point and you're possibly greatly exaggerating how far you were able to progress to prove that point. I may be wrong, maybe you just grinded 10 hours every day and paid a lot of money to get the strongest meta deck, but I am still having a hard time believing you. There are still tens of thousands of people that play Gwent every month that do not achieve pro rank, and you're saying you just casually picked it up and immediately got to that rank for 3 months straight? Pretty far fetched man. I recognize the validity of your argument for preventing rank loss, but unless you can come up with some photo evidence of your achieves for each season that you achieved pro I don't think you got anywhere near that high.
I mean i played the gwent version in the witcher game itself which has no resemblance to the current game and then i played the beta version on xbox one, but the game had a complete overhaul in how it's played. But yeah after the first week i jumped up passed rank 10, then i played the thronebreaker game to get the cool golden cards plus all the achievements that rewards you the keys in game which you can in turn get tons of free packs. i attached a photo from my mobile game screen that shows my first pro rank achievement back in december and then i got pro again in january, i thought i hit it again in February but i guess not i started playing raid shadow legends and now back to hearthstone. so it was only twice but they were consecutive and i was my first time playing gwent in the new format. Maybe the reason why i'm advocating the gwent ranking system for hearthstone is because it was much easier for me to be like, i'm off work and i'll focus on hitting rank 3, then next day 2 and next day 1. this system seemingly rewards more casual players but in reality it's just a more fair use of your time because you won't lose rank.
Also i was really hoping to keep this constructive and just talk about ideas of changes to the ranking system but it ended up being an accusatory forum of whether i did something or not. so lets keep about the actual topic please.
What point is legendary then? We might as well have no ranked if this system was in place.
it becomes about achieving high legend ranks which is where there is some real skill and strategy imo. I haven't been to high legend myself because when i've hit legend in hs i just play goofy decks. I also believe the more people hit legend the more experimental they would be and create/try new deck synergies instead of just picking tier 1 or 2 deck that someone else built just to try to get to legend.
Curious as to how much you spent / if you're paying someone to play for you to achieve pro rank in gwent every season for the first 3 seasons you picked it up, lol. I'm multi legend consistent rank 3 plus every season I play ranked and I had difficulty getting past rank 17-16 when I started playing gwent. I actually still haven't gotten past 16 bc I stopped playing it. So I'm a little skeptical that you apparently just picked it up and immediately became one of the best players in the game for 3 seasons straight. I mean if you were a pro sure, but you're just some guy that took 4 years to hit legend 3 times. I'm not buying it.
Well gwent doesn't have nearly as high of a player population so making it within the top 1000 players isn't that big of an achievement but i did it. I probably have spent a fair amount of money but more importantly time on both hearthstone and gwent so i could build decks that can compete at high ranks.
Yeah again, from my experience it's not that anywhere near that easy to get to pro rank in Gwent. I feel like you're trying to prove a point and you're possibly greatly exaggerating how far you were able to progress to prove that point. I may be wrong, maybe you just grinded 10 hours every day and paid a lot of money to get the strongest meta deck, but I am still having a hard time believing you. There are still tens of thousands of people that play Gwent every month that do not achieve pro rank, and you're saying you just casually picked it up and immediately got to that rank for 3 months straight? Pretty far fetched man. I recognize the validity of your argument for preventing rank loss, but unless you can come up with some photo evidence of your achieves for each season that you achieved pro I don't think you got anywhere near that high.
I mean i played the gwent version in the witcher game itself which has no resemblance to the current game and then i played the beta version on xbox one, but the game had a complete overhaul in how it's played. But yeah after the first week i jumped up passed rank 10, then i played the thronebreaker game to get the cool golden cards plus all the achievements that rewards you the keys in game which you can in turn get tons of free packs. i attached a photo from my mobile game screen that shows my first pro rank achievement back in december and then i got pro again in january, i thought i hit it again in February but i guess not i started playing raid shadow legends and now back to hearthstone. so it was only twice but they were consecutive and i was my first time playing gwent in the new format. Maybe the reason why i'm advocating the gwent ranking system for hearthstone is because it was much easier for me to be like, i'm off work and i'll focus on hitting rank 3, then next day 2 and next day 1. this system seemingly rewards more casual players but in reality it's just a more fair use of your time because you won't lose rank.
Also i was really hoping to keep this constructive and just talk about ideas of changes to the ranking system but it ended up being an accusatory forum of whether i did something or not. so lets keep about the actual topic please.
You could've taken a pic of anyone's profile and claimed that it was your own, but I'll take your word for it that this is yours. And still not sure I believe that you hit that rank immediately after you started playing since none of the achieves you chose to display are beginner achievements; you could've started playing years ago for all I can tell from those pics.
Regardless, HS already has what you're suggesting up to a certain rank in that you can't lose stars until you hit rank 20. With that said I'm not entirely opposed to the idea of having a ranked floor at each rank, but it kind of goes against the ethos devs have created for ranked to this point. Then again, people said the same thing when they initially introduced floors at 5, 10, and 15, and only the sweats really complained about that. I think I would've been more opposed to this last year when the meta wasn't such an RNG clown fiesta with so many OP cards, but now it feels more pointless to categorize players within broader skill groups like 20-15, 15-10 and 5-legend. I think it's possible devs might actually implement this in the future, but it's also equally possible they'll just keep things as they are. Not a bad idea tho
Curious as to how much you spent / if you're paying someone to play for you to achieve pro rank in gwent every season for the first 3 seasons you picked it up, lol. I'm multi legend consistent rank 3 plus every season I play ranked and I had difficulty getting past rank 17-16 when I started playing gwent. I actually still haven't gotten past 16 bc I stopped playing it. So I'm a little skeptical that you apparently just picked it up and immediately became one of the best players in the game for 3 seasons straight. I mean if you were a pro sure, but you're just some guy that took 4 years to hit legend 3 times. I'm not buying it.
Well gwent doesn't have nearly as high of a player population so making it within the top 1000 players isn't that big of an achievement but i did it. I probably have spent a fair amount of money but more importantly time on both hearthstone and gwent so i could build decks that can compete at high ranks.
Yeah again, from my experience it's not that anywhere near that easy to get to pro rank in Gwent. I feel like you're trying to prove a point and you're possibly greatly exaggerating how far you were able to progress to prove that point. I may be wrong, maybe you just grinded 10 hours every day and paid a lot of money to get the strongest meta deck, but I am still having a hard time believing you. There are still tens of thousands of people that play Gwent every month that do not achieve pro rank, and you're saying you just casually picked it up and immediately got to that rank for 3 months straight? Pretty far fetched man. I recognize the validity of your argument for preventing rank loss, but unless you can come up with some photo evidence of your achieves for each season that you achieved pro I don't think you got anywhere near that high.
I mean i played the gwent version in the witcher game itself which has no resemblance to the current game and then i played the beta version on xbox one, but the game had a complete overhaul in how it's played. But yeah after the first week i jumped up passed rank 10, then i played the thronebreaker game to get the cool golden cards plus all the achievements that rewards you the keys in game which you can in turn get tons of free packs. i attached a photo from my mobile game screen that shows my first pro rank achievement back in december and then i got pro again in january, i thought i hit it again in February but i guess not i started playing raid shadow legends and now back to hearthstone. so it was only twice but they were consecutive and i was my first time playing gwent in the new format. Maybe the reason why i'm advocating the gwent ranking system for hearthstone is because it was much easier for me to be like, i'm off work and i'll focus on hitting rank 3, then next day 2 and next day 1. this system seemingly rewards more casual players but in reality it's just a more fair use of your time because you won't lose rank.
Also i was really hoping to keep this constructive and just talk about ideas of changes to the ranking system but it ended up being an accusatory forum of whether i did something or not. so lets keep about the actual topic please.
You could've taken a pic of anyone's profile and claimed that it was your own, but I'll take your word for it that this is yours. And still not sure I believe that you hit that rank immediately after you started playing since none of the achieves you chose to display are beginner achievements; you could've started playing years ago for all I can tell from those pics.
Regardless, HS already has what you're suggesting up to a certain rank in that you can't lose stars until you hit rank 20. With that said I'm not entirely opposed to the idea of having a ranked floor at each rank, but it kind of goes against the ethos devs have created for ranked to this point. Then again, people said the same thing when they initially introduced floors at 5, 10, and 15, and only the sweats really complained about that. I think I would've been more opposed to this last year when the meta wasn't such an RNG clown fiesta with so many OP cards, but now it feels more pointless to categorize players within broader skill groups like 20-15, 15-10 and 5-legend. I think it's possible devs might actually implement this in the future, but it's also equally possible they'll just keep things as they are. Not a bad idea tho
thank you for those comments, also i somehow knew you would doubt the pictures and i could easily go into gwent right now and show my day 1 achievements dates vs the pro date but i'm done trying to prove what i accomplished lol
You could've taken a pic of anyone's profile and claimed that it was your own, but I'll take your word for it that this is yours. And still not sure I believe that you hit that rank immediately after you started playing since none of the achieves you chose to display are beginner achievements; you could've started playing years ago for all I can tell from those pics.
Regardless, HS already has what you're suggesting up to a certain rank in that you can't lose stars until you hit rank 20. With that said I'm not entirely opposed to the idea of having a ranked floor at each rank, but it kind of goes against the ethos devs have created for ranked to this point. Then again, people said the same thing when they initially introduced floors at 5, 10, and 15, and only the sweats really complained about that. I think I would've been more opposed to this last year when the meta wasn't such an RNG clown fiesta with so many OP cards, but now it feels more pointless to categorize players within broader skill groups like 20-15, 15-10 and 5-legend. I think it's possible devs might actually implement this in the future, but it's also equally possible they'll just keep things as they are. Not a bad idea tho
thank you for those comments, also i somehow knew you would doubt the pictures and i could easily go into gwent right now and show my day 1 achievements dates vs the pro date but i'm done trying to prove what i accomplished lol
Well you're certainly under no obligation to prove anything to me, I was just expressing my opinion. I still do genuinely think what you're suggesting could be implemented at some point in the future, and I don't think it would be such a bad thing
What point is legendary then? We might as well have no ranked if this system was in place.
it becomes about achieving high legend ranks which is where there is some real skill and strategy imo. I haven't been to high legend myself because when i've hit legend in hs i just play goofy decks. I also believe the more people hit legend the more experimental they would be and create/try new deck synergies instead of just picking tier 1 or 2 deck that someone else built just to try to get to legend.
Achieving legend still at least means a little. Obviously hitting high legend indicates the really good players, but legend is a midpoint and it should be difficult to achieve. Otherwise there shouldn't be a designation of legend, just a numerical value indicating where you are.
it becomes about achieving high legend ranks which is where there is some real skill and strategy imo. I haven't been to high legend myself because when i've hit legend in hs i just play goofy decks. I also believe the more people hit legend the more experimental they would be and create/try new deck synergies instead of just picking tier 1 or 2 deck that someone else built just to try to get to legend.
Then how about removing all ranking system and just having a number which indicated where you are ? And how can I practice my deck against, at least good player ? Do I need to climb to high legend and then repeat ? In current system, i could hit legend and then experiment with some deck to see if it really work. It make no sense to exercise them with noobs, as it doesnt prove anything. It just a waste of time.
Why cant people see this simple point : Everyone Constant progession = No one actually progession.
It will always be frustrating to lose games and lose stars accordingly. But that's part of the game. As others have pointed out, if you want legend status to mean something, it has to be challenging to obtain it.
I fell from rank 1 two days ago to rank 4. Ouch. I sucked it up and played a new deck and am now back at rank 1. Maybe I'll hit legend; maybe not.
But unless you want legend to be full of 10,000s of players (or more?) the game has to have losing stars as a part of its ladder system.
And of course, everyone should remember the golden rule: it's a game, nothing more, and if you have a bad rank one season, life goes on. I am sure everyone has more meaningful things going on their lives that matter far more than what you rank is in Hearthstone.
I think people are misunderstanding, i'm not coming from a frustration of climbing standpoint it's more to keep players engaged in the game and allowing themselves to be more flexible with the decks they use instead of just the popular tier 1 and 2 decks to climb. Also there might be some confusion by some people, you absolutely would lose starts within each rank but never drop the rank if you're at 0 stars. Overall i believe this system would enhance the playing experience for the majority of the playerbase and increase the diversity of decks being played.
I think people are misunderstanding, i'm not coming from a frustration of climbing standpoint it's more to keep players engaged in the game and allowing themselves to be more flexible with the decks they use instead of just the popular tier 1 and 2 decks to climb. Also there might be some confusion by some people, you absolutely would lose starts within each rank but never drop the rank if you're at 0 stars. Overall i believe this system would enhance the playing experience for the majority of the playerbase and increase the diversity of decks being played.
Actually that is a fair point. It probably would increase the diversity of decks being played if the fear of losing stars was reduced. Hmmm... I guess we'll never know, unfortunately. Although, there is casual mode. I play there sometimes, and alas, I do not find there is much deck diversity compared to the ladder. People still just want to win.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
I mean i played the gwent version in the witcher game itself which has no resemblance to the current game and then i played the beta version on xbox one, but the game had a complete overhaul in how it's played. But yeah after the first week i jumped up passed rank 10, then i played the thronebreaker game to get the cool golden cards plus all the achievements that rewards you the keys in game which you can in turn get tons of free packs. i attached a photo from my mobile game screen that shows my first pro rank achievement back in december and then i got pro again in january, i thought i hit it again in February but i guess not i started playing raid shadow legends and now back to hearthstone. so it was only twice but they were consecutive and i was my first time playing gwent in the new format. Maybe the reason why i'm advocating the gwent ranking system for hearthstone is because it was much easier for me to be like, i'm off work and i'll focus on hitting rank 3, then next day 2 and next day 1. this system seemingly rewards more casual players but in reality it's just a more fair use of your time because you won't lose rank.
Also i was really hoping to keep this constructive and just talk about ideas of changes to the ranking system but it ended up being an accusatory forum of whether i did something or not. so lets keep about the actual topic please.
Google search: Is Hearthstone free to play?
it becomes about achieving high legend ranks which is where there is some real skill and strategy imo. I haven't been to high legend myself because when i've hit legend in hs i just play goofy decks. I also believe the more people hit legend the more experimental they would be and create/try new deck synergies instead of just picking tier 1 or 2 deck that someone else built just to try to get to legend.
Google search: Is Hearthstone free to play?
You could've taken a pic of anyone's profile and claimed that it was your own, but I'll take your word for it that this is yours. And still not sure I believe that you hit that rank immediately after you started playing since none of the achieves you chose to display are beginner achievements; you could've started playing years ago for all I can tell from those pics.
Regardless, HS already has what you're suggesting up to a certain rank in that you can't lose stars until you hit rank 20. With that said I'm not entirely opposed to the idea of having a ranked floor at each rank, but it kind of goes against the ethos devs have created for ranked to this point. Then again, people said the same thing when they initially introduced floors at 5, 10, and 15, and only the sweats really complained about that. I think I would've been more opposed to this last year when the meta wasn't such an RNG clown fiesta with so many OP cards, but now it feels more pointless to categorize players within broader skill groups like 20-15, 15-10 and 5-legend. I think it's possible devs might actually implement this in the future, but it's also equally possible they'll just keep things as they are. Not a bad idea tho
thank you for those comments, also i somehow knew you would doubt the pictures and i could easily go into gwent right now and show my day 1 achievements dates vs the pro date but i'm done trying to prove what i accomplished lol
Google search: Is Hearthstone free to play?
Well you're certainly under no obligation to prove anything to me, I was just expressing my opinion. I still do genuinely think what you're suggesting could be implemented at some point in the future, and I don't think it would be such a bad thing
Achieving legend still at least means a little. Obviously hitting high legend indicates the really good players, but legend is a midpoint and it should be difficult to achieve. Otherwise there shouldn't be a designation of legend, just a numerical value indicating where you are.
Then how about removing all ranking system and just having a number which indicated where you are ? And how can I practice my deck against, at least good player ? Do I need to climb to high legend and then repeat ? In current system, i could hit legend and then experiment with some deck to see if it really work. It make no sense to exercise them with noobs, as it doesnt prove anything. It just a waste of time.
Why cant people see this simple point : Everyone Constant progession = No one actually progession.
It will always be frustrating to lose games and lose stars accordingly. But that's part of the game. As others have pointed out, if you want legend status to mean something, it has to be challenging to obtain it.
I fell from rank 1 two days ago to rank 4. Ouch. I sucked it up and played a new deck and am now back at rank 1. Maybe I'll hit legend; maybe not.
But unless you want legend to be full of 10,000s of players (or more?) the game has to have losing stars as a part of its ladder system.
And of course, everyone should remember the golden rule: it's a game, nothing more, and if you have a bad rank one season, life goes on. I am sure everyone has more meaningful things going on their lives that matter far more than what you rank is in Hearthstone.
I think people are misunderstanding, i'm not coming from a frustration of climbing standpoint it's more to keep players engaged in the game and allowing themselves to be more flexible with the decks they use instead of just the popular tier 1 and 2 decks to climb. Also there might be some confusion by some people, you absolutely would lose starts within each rank but never drop the rank if you're at 0 stars. Overall i believe this system would enhance the playing experience for the majority of the playerbase and increase the diversity of decks being played.
Google search: Is Hearthstone free to play?
Actually that is a fair point. It probably would increase the diversity of decks being played if the fear of losing stars was reduced. Hmmm... I guess we'll never know, unfortunately. Although, there is casual mode. I play there sometimes, and alas, I do not find there is much deck diversity compared to the ladder. People still just want to win.