Why aren't our ranks shown as #'s?
It would mean players could see exactly how big the PvP playerbase would be, and make a bunch of judgements based on that. I doubt Anet would do that. They’re a fan of hiding controversial numbers.
Forum Lord Chaith
Twitch.tv/chaithh
New Twitter: @chaithhh
Twitch.tv/chaithh
New Twitter: @chaithhh
You have to be in top 250 I think it is, to see your rank.
John Snowman [GLTY]
Space Marine Z [GLTY]
Space Marine Z [GLTY]
You have to be in top 250 I think it is, to see your rank.
Top 1000 and you get a number. Before that you are 99% and down from there.
#1 Player Granada
#1 Player Comoros
#1 Player Comoros
You have to be in top 250 I think it is, to see your rank.
Top 1000 and you get a number. Before that you are 99% and down from there.
lmao, what percent is considered good?
You have to be in top 250 I think it is, to see your rank.
Top 1000 and you get a number. Before that you are 99% and down from there.
lmao, what percent is considered good?
None right now since the LBs are no indicator of skill.
Former PvP commentator for ESL & Arenanet.
I used to run the Academy Gaming tournaments for GW2.
I used to run the Academy Gaming tournaments for GW2.
You have to be in top 250 I think it is, to see your rank.
Top 1000 and you get a number. Before that you are 99% and down from there.
lmao, what percent is considered good?
Well since the leader boards doesn’t mean “skill”. I would say none. It is more on “games played” then anything else.
If you want “worst to best” (aka: more games played), then it would be 1% to 99% and continue to rank 1000 all the way to rank #1.
Rank 1000 person has 132 games played. Rank 1 has 763 in past 29 days. (couple below rank 1 actually have more games played, just a worse ratio.
#1 Player Granada
#1 Player Comoros
#1 Player Comoros
(edited by GhOst.4019)
You have to be in top 250 I think it is, to see your rank.
Top 1000 and you get a number. Before that you are 99% and down from there.
lmao, what percent is considered good?
Well since the leader boards doesn’t mean “skill”. I would say none. It is more on “games played” then anything else.
If you want “worst to best” (aka: more games played), then it would be 1% to 99% and continue to rank 1000 all the way to rank #1.Rank 1000 person has 132 games played. Rank 1 has 763 in past 29 days. (couple below rank 1 actually have more games played, just a worse ratio.
My question is more so whyis the leaderboards set up like so instead of skill? ?
It’s supposed to show a combination of skill + effort. Previous LBs you could be #1 with ~10 games played.
You do want some kind of combination, but the current LB is too heavy on “effort”. It was just a trial season, hopefully it gets adjusted soon.
It’s supposed to show a combination of skill + effort. Previous LBs you could be #1 with ~10 games played.
You do want some kind of combination, but the current LB is too heavy on “effort”. It was just a trial season, hopefully it gets adjusted soon.
Hopefully, I mean its not hard to assign a rating for everyone to be attached to while they have a hidden mmr for the matchmaking to use In order to pair likley even skilled players vs each other.