Struggling to reach rank 20

[Snake_Foxhounder]

The "real" game is spamming Monsters and Skellige and then posting "I got to rank 21" on reddit.

OP, I don't think reveal can get you to 20. Players at that level are using tryhard decks (not insulting anyone here) and some decks are just better than others. Also, people at that rank make less mistakes and know their decks well. Bottom line is, the deck you're using probably can't keep up.

 

[SigilFey]

For example you play 30 ranked matches with NR, 25 with NG and 20 with monsters, but you haven't played any match with Scoia'Tael. If you play Scoia'Tael you have bonus, in case of defeat you lose less MMR, -5% for example, but in case of victory you earn more 5% MMR.

...and Lyserus

Oooooo...

I like the idea of shifting MMR bonuses. I think that's got some potential. (Also has the potential for some majorly infuriating bugs, too! )

What I'm thinking is more of a universal system that affects the entire faction. Therefore, if a certain faction starts dominating the boards, the MMR and rewards gained by playing said faction decreases faction-wide across the server. Players would receive a universal bonus for playing presently "underdog" factions and a universal penalty for playing strong factions. And the bonus / penalty would shift based upon ongoing server results.

Not only could this encourage players to experiment with various factions / decks, it would also mitigate the issue of exploitative tactics by making ongoing wins produce diminishing returns and resulting in larger payouts for players that manage to overcome them. (Potentially, if there were a sudden, extreme swing, it would make balance issues immediately apparent for development, as well.)

 

[partci]

How can I put this... you can still play all factions, but playing by a leader for each. This will make you a diverse player for sure, but then there are leaders like Harold, Ancient Elder and Morvran. So I am not sure that we have problem A with Factions and Problem B with leaders. Cause right now we have sort of a good balance between all the factions, but Leaders wise...

 

[Archpriest]

@ChlopiecZZapalkami

I find what you're saying very insulting and disrespectful. Also wrong.

"The real game".

Like: get the best OP net-deck and run it to no avail, killing all the diversity in the game, cause everybody have to play the same s#it over and over again.


It's so "real".

While he is blunt, he has a point. First of all, everybody plays meta decks - above AND below rank 18. Hell, even in Casual the do it for whatever reason.

But what is undeniable is that, above 18, the play level is higher too. You can really sleepwalk into rank 18, winning isn't as crucial. After that, you need to sustain at least a 3-2 ration to advance.

Btw, taking a few week long breaks form the game *cough* also takes you out of your game

 

[gigabomb]

Dunno if everyone has seen this, but it charts out the average mmr point gains and losses.

https://i.redd.it/hwapfqivebcz.png

It's clear that getting to 2000 mmr is almost free because of the very small MMR loss. Once 3100 rolls around, you need to win 1 out of 3 just to maintain your standing, and, even at 14, people are starting to play complex combos that make huge point swings: It's getting brutal. I'm probably just going to hold at 15 or 16 to get the end of season rewards, drop back to casual, and work on building my own decks until the new season. I do refuse to make a netdeck and mill my other decks though, so someone that does might have a different experience.

 

[Archpriest]

Dunno if everyone has seen this, but it charts out the average mmr point gains and losses.

https://i.redd.it/hwapfqivebcz.png

It's clear that getting to 2000 mmr is almost free because of the very small MMR loss. Once 3100 rolls around, you need to win 1 out of 3 just to maintain your standing, and, even at 14, people are starting to play complex combos that make huge point swings: It's getting brutal. I'm probably just going to hold at 15 or 16 to get the end of season rewards, drop back to casual, and work on building my own decks until the new season. I do refuse to make a netdeck and mill my other decks though, so someone that does might have a different experience.

Nobody tells anyone to play net decks. However, if you want to win in ranked, sooner or later your own decks will be quite similar to the meta. And no, I'm not solely talking about top 2 decks atm (one of which should clearly be addressed and the other has been countered already by other decks). There are other variations that win too, it's just those aren't provided by streamers or anyone else and, consequently, far less known.
Also, no offense but bringing "I refuse to play net decks" as an excuse for losing is just that... an excuse. And not a very good one, imo. There are many players who use their own decks or significantly tweak someone else's basic idea to fit their style of play. Some, like to exchange ideas with their friends and even test each other's decks. And if you do choose to go that way, prepare yourself for huge mmr fluctuations

 

[BlunderMan]

I'm in much the same boat, I've hit a brick wall at ~4100MMR. I think the difficulty is spot on, you really have to put some work in and master the game to reach the master rank. Most anyone can get there with a good deck and correct play, but it's a real challenge. And beyond that are the real pro-level players who have taken the game to the next level.

Netdecking is what it is, there's no way to stop it from being a part of the game. It's like memorizing opening lines in chess, you can work out your own ideas or you can take the shortcut. A the top levels, everyone will converge on similar ideas regardless.

 

[ChaosPhantom819]

I'm just above 4k and I'm really struggling to rank up. I think I'm just going to make a deck to counter the meta right now.

 

[devivre]

I think I'm just going to make a deck to counter the meta right now.

Sounds like a good idea

 

[BornBoring]

Nearly everyone can reach master. So everyone has the chance to get good rewards and collect cards quickly. But only the best can reach grandmaster and that's how it should be! Anyway pro ladder doesn't give you any rewards. So I don't think it's really worth playing if you can't compete with the best. What the game is lacking in my opinion are more game modes to add more diversity.

 

[TheRedWatcher]

What the game is lacking in my opinion are more game modes to add more diversity.

You know this. In Yugioh and MTG they have tag duals. Wouldn't that be something? Tag Gwent matches.

 

[Archpriest]

Sounds like a good idea

And probably impossible too, given the top two decks at the moment (slight variations do not count as "different'). You tech against one and lose to the other... And that's why I don't like the rock/paper/scissors.

 

[TheRedWatcher]

I think there should be some way to reward more creative plays and more creative decks in pro. Then to have to be like "time to whip out the yield google and get meself a netdeck to win". There really is not satisfaction winning with a deck you haven't made yourself, imo.

 

[jovi_wan_kenobi]

once you reach 18 shit gets real.

Game is really starting to frustrate me. I spend hours and hours, floating between 3700 and 3900 points, but no chance to get this magical 4000 limit. I reached level 17 at degree 24, what was hard enough. I'm currently 35/18 and playing regularly against mates from 50-60/18, so it's not just me with that 'problem'. Can somebody please tell me the strategy how to reach level 19 (and higher)?

 

[HTMekkatorque]

I think CDPR purely designed their system to have this tricky sticking point. It was designed in such a way that even if you have a terrible win ratio you can still achieve rank 17 then break even i believe is rank 18 so I presume rank 19 is like the opposite degree of difficulty to players in ranked 17. Assuming you're already running a pretty kitted out deck and you have a firm understanding of card game mechanics I believe that some people just understand it a little more than you and some players just aren't ment to hit the top rank. Also probably has a lot to do with luck in top elo, presuming almost everybody is playing a near perfect game you can still draw x golds and your opponent may still have gotten a more strengthy hand and if the situation in the high elos is really around 3 or 4 decks well then maybe get ahead of the curve and make a deck that counters them all.

 

[BartjeBink]

Quick follow up question (I'm sadly not allowed to start my own topic yet):

I started playing 2 weeks ago, and I'm now at rank 15. If I win a game I get 40-50 points and if I lose I only drop about 10 points.

At what ELO do the points lost and points gained start to be around the same amount? As it stands now, even with a 30% win-rate I'd still be climbing

Im at rank 17 (3400-3700) and im already at that point. When i win i get 25-30 and when i lose i lose 25-30. Im just not sure if its because all my oponents forfeit since i strongly feel i get way more points when they dont forfeit

 

[arubino99]

Im at rank 17 (3400-3700) and im already at that point. When i win i get 25-30 and when i lose i lose 25-30. Im just not sure if its because all my oponents forfeit since i strongly feel i get way more points when they dont forfeit

It's the same whether they forfeit or not. There used to be a thing where if an opponent forfeited, you got less experience, but that was corrected I believe.

Just wait until you get higher, and you need 60% w/l to advance. I usually reach a point where it takes 10 games to get 10 points. There's a reason the top players have hundreds of games played.

 

[Maerd]

Just wait until you get higher, and you need 60% w/l to advance. I usually reach a point where it takes 10 games to get 10 points. There's a reason the top players have hundreds of games played.

So, if you really need 60% rate then the system is flawed because to keep your rank with more or less even competition,meaning you play with people who about the same skill and about the same competitiveness of their decks) ... you should not play at all. Such system benefits the first player who, somehow, come up with a competitive deck, climbed on top with it and, when other players reacted stopped playing completely.

 

[ChlopiecZZapalkami]

So, if you really need 60% rate then the system is flawed because to keep your rank with more or less even competition,meaning you play with people who about the same skill and about the same competitiveness of their decks) ... you should not play at all. Such system benefits the first player who, somehow, come up with a competitive deck, climbed on top with it and, when other players reacted stopped playing completely.

Quite the oposite. the system isnt flawed becouse it encourage to INEWNT new decks that will beat other decks. People that create one strong deck in next week or two have to change it couse meta is evolving and i think its very good unllike playing same deck builded at the beggining of the sezon and just smashing everyone with it.
Being unpredictable is key strategy in gwent and inventors are being rewarded for it by hiting high ranks. Those who dont adopt to changes ( or net deck) end up being stuck at certain rank and come on forums to vent out their frustration.

ninja edit: just teake a look on "OP decks" last week or two weeks ago it was skelige, now nilfgard fwe weeks ago monsters, NR etc. New sezon will hit and there will be the same story all over again

thats how i see it

 

[arubino99]

So, if you really need 60% rate then the system is flawed because to keep your rank with more or less even competition,meaning you play with people who about the same skill and about the same competitiveness of their decks) ... you should not play at all. Such system benefits the first player who, somehow, come up with a competitive deck, climbed on top with it and, when other players reacted stopped playing completely.

It's only semi rigid. MMR isn't a true ELO system where points are more finite. As time progresses, more points get added to the pool in Gwent's MMR system. In other words, Gwent's system is not a zero-sum system. Thus, the more games you play, the higher your MMR becomes. That's why high ranking players have hundreds of games, because MMR is ever increasing.

As a clear example, at the season outset, you might see the highest ranking player hit 3400 the first week. By the second, it's 3800, and by the 3rd, it's usually 4200+. From there, it keeps climbing. Highest player this season I think is 4600 or so. Maybe more, I haven't looked in a week. If you don't play, you get left behind.