Posted on 03 December 2015 - 06:35 AM
High elo isn't as hard to achieve anymore, imo nothing below 2400 is an achievement anymorePosted on 03 December 2015 - 07:56 AM
DaGoldBrick wrote
Most untrue statement I've ever heard
Posted on 03 December 2015 - 09:41 AM
DaGoldBrick wrote
Below 2400 isn't an achievement LOL I hope you're joking. First of all it depends on the ladder, second, anything over 2000 is a pretty good achievement I'd say. 2400 has only been reached by like a couple people and that's only because Build UHC is so popular that the elos are higher…
Posted on 03 December 2015 - 11:26 AM
SirJensen wrote
DaGoldBrick wrote...
Below 2400 isn't an achievement LOL I hope you're joking. First of all it depends on the ladder, second, anything over 2000 is a pretty good achievement I'd say. 2400 has only been reached by like a couple people and that's only because Build UHC is so popular that the elos are higher…
I'm talking about build as it seems no one fucking plays any other ladder
Edit: In relativity, say if 2500 was the highest elo in a pot ladder in this current community, I would say anything below 2400 isn't that impressive.
Posted on 03 December 2015 - 11:28 AM
ItsTene wrote
DaGoldBrick wrote...
Most untrue statement I've ever heard
I've heard more untrue statements from you xD
Posted on 03 December 2015 - 11:32 AM
DaGoldBrick wrote
SirJensen wrote...
I'm talking about build as it seems no one fucking plays any other ladder
lol I play all of the ladders, but I'm still proud of my 2200 Build. I had gotten 2240 on an alt once as well. I certainly do believe I could get to 2300-2400, but I don't think that you should only consider 2400 an achievement lol.
Posted on 03 December 2015 - 11:42 AM
SirJensen wrote
DaGoldBrick wrote...
lol I play all of the ladders, but I'm still proud of my 2200 Build. I had gotten 2240 on an alt once as well. I certainly do believe I could get to 2300-2400, but I don't think that you should only consider 2400 an achievement lol.
With the amount of people who play it, bad people are bound to be at a higher threshold making gaining elo easier in that specific ladder. I always only considered anything within the top elo -100 good, so like in gapple I wouldn't call anything an achievement for myself unless it's around -100 of the top elo.
Posted on 03 December 2015 - 12:09 PM
DaGoldBrick wrote
SirJensen wrote...
With the amount of people who play it, bad people are bound to be at a higher threshold making gaining elo easier in that specific ladder. I always only considered anything within the top elo -100 good, so like in gapple I wouldn't call anything an achievement for myself unless it's around -100 of the top elo.
I agree with DaGoldBrick to some extent because if you are to be considered elite in that ladder, being within 100 points is very reasonable and should be done with no issues. Of course there are some exceptions, and I don't think he's trying to say that 2200 is bad, but it simply isn't elite or something worth bragging about
Posted on 03 December 2015 - 01:03 PM
DaGoldBrick wrote
But your highest elo doesn't even have 2k…:o
Posted on 03 December 2015 - 01:07 PM
ThatTacoGuy208 wrote
DaGoldBrick wrote...
But your highest elo doesn't even have 2k…:o
Because I only play with this account on kohi lol
Posted on 03 December 2015 - 01:13 PM
I kinda agree with brick.. you don't get any attention or reward if you get 2200 elo like you used to. Now it's 2400 and your dick gets sucked for freePosted on 03 December 2015 - 01:52 PM
DaGoldBrick wrote
This is the most untrue statement I've ever heard, so to actually achieve something you have to pass 2400? So only around 5 people on the server have achieved an ELO goal. Logic.
Last edited on 05 August 2016 - 10:41 AM by Kegsersleeuwen
-Posted on 03 December 2015 - 04:13 PM
Unsighted wrote
DaGoldBrick wrote...
This is the most untrue statement I've ever heard, so to actually achieve something you have to pass 2400? So only around 5 people on the server have achieved an ELO goal. Logic.
That's my opinion.
And tbh I don't really care about yours, it won't change mine
Also I was talking about relative to other elos if you bothered to read the other posts
Posted on 03 December 2015 - 04:52 PM
2500 > EnchantedXI HAHAHA love it xDPosted on 03 December 2015 - 05:15 PM
Too be honest I feel like, 2k as a donor isn't even an accomplishment. Like try and get 2k with 20 matches a day.Posted on 03 December 2015 - 05:17 PM
ThatTacoGuy208 wrote
Posted on 03 December 2015 - 05:24 PM
DaGoldBrick wrote
ItsTene wrote...
I've heard more untrue statements from you xD
There's absolutely no correlation and that's an ad hominem. I find it extremely difficult to get 1800 in any ladder.
Posted on 03 December 2015 - 05:38 PM
ItsTene wrote
DaGoldBrick wrote...
There's absolutely no correlation and that's an ad hominem. I find it extremely difficult to get 1800 in any ladder.
@ItsTene There is a difference, when you are a non donor and you lose something and you run out of matches you need to wait a whole day. As a donor it's a lot easier to get back up to the elo you were when you got drained…
Posted on 03 December 2015 - 05:39 PM
morsinius wrote
Morsinius wrote...
But more specifically for the only ladder I play:
<1100: Never played against admittedly
1100-1299: Awful aim, mostly poor dodging and little strafing
1300-1395: Pretty bad all around, but occasionally found with god tier strafing or dodging
1396-1399: Don't be fooled, these are good players in disguise who've lost to 1925+ players
1400: Wildcard
1401-1499: Very predictable strafe (generally one direction or left right), bad aiming
1500-1599: Same strafe as 1400s, only slightly better aiming or more grinding
1600-1699: The robot strafe and aim range
1700-1753: Play a bit more
1754: everyone who has this sucks
1755-1849: Being to know what they're doing: more aggressive, alternate tactics may come into play
1850-1949: Start seeing alternate tactics more often, far better aiming and possible dodging
1950-1999: Doing something wrong that's holding them back from 2k
2000-2049: Low "good" players – able to maintain a decent rating by demonstrating ability with inpredictability
2050-2100: Established players who can play the Elo game well
2100-2174: The best of the best for robot players, and a stepping stone for non-robot players; they're able to grind better, able to utilize unconventional tactics, have extremely good game sense and/or are starting to specialize in one area of archery – overall, they show expertise in being unpredictable
2175-2225: Add a bit more patience and less throwing
2226-2300: In their own league; these players don't lose unless they gain an early disadvantage – almost all of these players will be specialised in some area, be it aiming, dodging, strafing or something else
>2300: See above, but with more time
The only post here that matters.