Duelyst Forums

Proplayers not as good?

#22

Another thing to consider is players like my self are always testing out new things, frequently play when utterly exhausted, and are sometimes either distracted or just having an off day, on top of rng and bad matchups.

When your not in a tournament, or its not towards the end of the season your rank matters little. My win streaks and position on the ladder can be quite volatile. I regularly go to top 50, get close to top 10, then a combination of things I listed happen and I will sink way down the S rank ladder. Then some months I just don’t play very much, I will mess around casually a little, then try-hard for just a day or two and will just get into diamond or S and then not really play much more. Then on a related note as others have pointed out Ladder and Tourney play are very different creatures.

When I sit down to play competitively its different, I make sure I am rested, focused, and playing my best stuff, and when that happens I can get to S rank in a couple days and or top of the ladder. But most of the time I just don’t do that.

Also health is not a very good indicator of how close a game was, health is a resource to be managed and spent, and it is very likely that it was done so intentionally in order to maintain the board or card advantage which tend to be much more important then health alone. The only thing that matters with health is staying out of lethal range. I constantly do calculations based on the faction I am up against to see if they could finish me off and how likely it is and act accordingly. Based on your profile posts you seem to favor lyonar which have almost no out of hand damage. You have holy immolation, and maybe tiger, and thats about it. So I would be happy to trade health vs you rather then a different resource and then I would play around those two cards making it very hard for you to finish me with them.

I also don’t see what you have against arcanyst, after the last round of nerfs we have one of the most balanced and diverse metas we have seen in a very long time. Its also finally a slower meta which allows for a lot more skill then the almost whole year of SMORC Argeon and Aggro Reva. And as it was pointed out, especially if your playing an off meta deck, whether it is an inferior archtype or not, means you have the upperhand because they wont be playing around what you have.

#23

Please tell me where i can find that balanced and diverse meta on the ladder, all i see is Faie, Lilith, Vaath and Starhorn. And what’s worse, unlike in other previous metas where other off meta stuff was still viable, the dominance of the top 3 is so stiffling that it’s almost impossible to play something else effectively.

Especially slow decks are in a difficult spot because if your slow deck can’t beat Arcanyst Faie/Lilith then it’s just outright unviable. Tried my Midrange Sajj end of last month, got raped so hard it wasn’t funny. Atm i am playing Ziran and it’s the same. I can literally just concede against Faie and Lilith because i have no way to win the long game and i am too slow to rush them down.

Pre AB Meta was a hell of a lot better, yeah Tempo Argeon was a pain but he wasn’t half as oppressive as the current top decks. Hell i’d even say pre nerf meta was better because if nothing else, disruption faie at least kept that Arcanyst plague in check and left some breathing room for other midrange decks. Not to mention that Cassyva wasn’t dead back then :frowning:

#24

I have found that fast variants of Zirix, Argeon, Reva, and Starhorn are pretty strong against the current meta, banglehai is also pretty strong against vaath if that is bothering you.

As for slow decks, I have had good sucess with bond Argeon, what resouces does anyone have for ironcliff+aegis barrier? the only cards that I can think of that deal with it cleanly are: enfeeble (not run often), metamorphosis (see enfeeble), plasma storm (roar says hi) repulsor beast (I haven’t seen this outside gauntlet in months), and ghost lynx (an ok meme, try it sometime).

Another slow deck I have been playing with sucess has been keeper Vaath, which tends to absolutely destroy arcanyst decks, if you want a list I can show you mine, it is really fun to play and I reccomend trying it out.

1 Like
#25

If you check the various tier lists you will see rather then just one or two decks at the top there are quite a few. If you check the overall faction winrates they are very close together, the closest in a long time.

Even if it was just those four, that would still be twice the diversity of the last year. It has been Argeon and or Reva with a significant lead for almost a full year, and in an aggro meta where slow decks were barely viable at all. It was much more oppressive, and lower skilled in general. And then a brief oppressive moment of disruption faie which has since been brought back in line. Lillith is also still not top tier, but has sort of finally switched with Cass for the tier two position.

…also I am sorry to break it to you, and while you can certainly make them work because of the fairly balanced meta, you just listed two of the three trash tier generals, the other being Kaleious, so that’s just not a very good indicator.

Arcanyst are notoriously understatted, any aoe really messes them up, and you should always save removal for owlbeast. While Trinity Wing is powerful, you can prevent its bond effect from going off, and while blue conjurer is very anoying, it’s slow rng nature really keeps it in check. Sure Death Knell Lillith is the king of the late game, but it can certainly struggle to get there even agaisnt slower decks, you just really have to be the aggressor in that match up.

This really sounds more like a problem with you adapting to the meta, not the game. Yea if you just play the same decks you played last season your going to have a rough time. There is so much more room for skill and counterplay right now then there has been in a long time.

2 Likes
#26

Its impossible to make perfect balance
But do you consider it fine if 3 generals are straightup trashtier?Although not all can be equaly viable shouldnt they atleast be somewhat close?
And to trinity…good luck preventing its bond against a faie which can just keep a 1mana illusionist in hand(circulus) and can ramp very easyly to 6mana

Also do you consider it right that arcanyst faie,zir`an and lilth are stronger than their traditional archetypes?

I certainly think that arcanysts need to be turned down a little(specialy faie)

#27

See my previous post, despite that I labeled them “trash tier” it is by a narrow margin based on general win rates. There will always be a best and a worst, but right now the numbers are very close together.

Arcanyst are not stronger then traditional Archtypes (at least not by a significant margin) as there is a lot of ways to counter them, primarily Aoe, save removal for owlbeast, and or be the aggressor if its Lillith. If you don’t have or do these things that’s on you, especialy becuase they are popular right now.

Yes circulus is a card that is a little to strong and should always be a high prioity removal target, but that is not inherently a bad thing as long as the faction and the generals win rates are not to oppressive, and since the last round of nerfs they are not. I still think circulus/conjurer should not trigger from BBs but you have to be careful with nerfs as right now things are very close together, hitting them again might drop them out of the top tier entirely which is not a good thing.

#28

I honestly don’t give jackshit about Bagoum and Co. They are highly subjektive by nature and the only subjektive meta perception that matters for me is my own because that’s the one that decides whether or not i have fun playing. And my personal perception of what the meta looks like i’ve posted above. Easily 70% of the time it’s one of the 4 generals listed above and the rest is mostly Reva and Zirix. Don’t know about you but diverse looks different in my opinion.

I never had any issues with Tempo Argeon, even my all time trash tier favorite Sajj had a decent matchup against him. Argeon was beatable with pretty much everything, even trash tier generals. October Reva was a massive pain agreed but that was by far the worst meta ever anyway.

Right, and if i can’t remove him immediately the turn he is played i am fucked because all his arcanysts are immortal afterwards. Not to mention that in the lategame, even if i remove him immediately, i am still fucked because the buffs are already there at this point it’s basically have a lightbender or concede.

Literally had a game today where i’ve dispelled the first owlbeast had my opponent down to 6 and then lost because he played and buffed two owls and i never saw one of my 2 remaining lightbenders in like 5 turns before i died.

This isn’t about adopting to the meta, this is me wanting to play the generals I’d like to play, not the ones CPG forces me to. And my ability to do this is the lowest ever second only to October. If your telling me there are lists for Sajj or Zir’an that are viable on top level i’d really like to see them.[quote=“deathsadvocate, post:27, topic:9695”]
See my previous post, despite that I labeled them “trash tier” it is by a narrow margin based on general win rates. There will always be a best and a worst, but right now the numbers are very close together.
[/quote]

Don’t know where you get your numbers from but if i look at https://duelysthub.com monthly stats i don’t see any “narrow margin”. Not even close. Especially not regarding the trash tier generals. Even the average generals are a good 5% off from the top tier. And Kaleos has the honor of being almost 20% away from the top tier which is probably a negative record for this game. Can’t remember another month where the gap was that huge.

#29

Personal preference of an aggro meta or a control meta, or what generals you like facing is irrelevant to wether there is balance and diversity. As is conformation bias about what you face. You hate it, I love it, and it’s a simmilar split throughout the community, and every game, so it’s just not relevant.

I am sorry you dislike the meta, but there are at least as many people that disliked the previous couple as there those that dislike this one.

Yes Kal and Zirian are farther out then usual, but everyone else is much closer then they have ever been before. There has never been 6! Generals within three % of each that I can remeber, it’s always been one or two.

And starhorn used to be trash tier but finally got enough support and a meta that was friendly to him that he has moved on up, those bottom two could get the same, but unforuntantly their fundamental design that makes you like them is part of the issue, as the best way to move them up would be to rework them, similar to how Kara went through two versions of BBs untill finally geting a balanced healthy one.

#30

Which 6?
Im pretty sure
vaath
starthorn
lilith
faie
kara
reva

3 of those use arcanysts as their primary ,metaarchetpye,since arcanyst decks are very similar we can already decrease this number to 3

3, generals, which are far superior to every other general…octoberreva is probably the only one which can top that
Simply put baharoth is completely right

#31

There are 8-9 generals who do well in this meta, that’s more than most metas, even if 3 are similar archtypes (all of which play very differently) that is still 6-7, this is a very diverse meta, just because you are unable to innovate and change how you play doesn’t mean the meta is bad.

2 Likes
#32

Correction 3% margin for the top 6 generals, not two, but within 1% for the top 4, is the most diverse competitive meta by far we have had, the top has always been one or two, and then usualy by like 5% compared to the rest. And discussion of whether the game is balanced and diverse is very different from liking or disliking arcanysts. A 1% or 3% margin is definitely not “Far Superior”.

In those top 6 only Kara uses Arcanyst as its primary deck. Disruption faie is still quite common. And running golems is completely optional in the rest. All of them have quite a few different top notch decks. Yes there are individual staple cards like Circulus and Lavaslasher but there is a lot of different deck types and its not just tribal stuff all over the place.

And as I said Arcanysts are still quite counter-able, yes they are popular right now, but popularity and personal preference is not the discussion here. The fact is there is a lot of diversity in all of generals, factions, and decks. And especially because arcanysts are trending right now you should be teching to deal with them.

#33

I’m all for discussing the current meta and how it compares to others, but maybe there’s a better thread for discussions like this. :slightly_smiling_face:

3 Likes
#34

eh, not as far as I can see, if this goes too off topic then it will just be locked anyways

#35

To compare this topic to professional sports regular season ladder is like regular season play for a sports club - any team can beat any other team on any given night despite the fact that one team may be considered “elite” and the other not. And there are a lot of different, varying factors involved in such a thing. Even in sports “luck” is considered a factor. If you watch hockey you’ll know there is a term: puck luck. Sometimes the puck will take a funny bounce off the boards and slide in the net. The point being that luck and skill; being tired and we’ll rested etc. All can influence any particular game.

As a result what matters is consistency in play. The better “teams/players” are the ones that consistently win a large proportion of games throughout their season and those are the ones whom will reach top 50 ladder or following the analogue the playoffs. A large part of this boils down to the coach’s (you the player) playstyle and game plan and their ability to enact that gameplan consistently.

Top tier players aren’t gods, they’re just regular people like you and I whom are particularly talented at what they do. But it doesn’t mean that their level of play is unreachable it just depends on how much time and effort you put into learning the game and improving. For example, I had never played a ccg before duelyst, it took me 6 seasons to hit S for the first time. And since then I’ve now been S for 9 straight seasons (soon to be 10) and I’m still trying to learn how to reach top tier levels of play but I’m willing to put in the effort and practice to figure it out.

1 Like
#36

to me the definition of a pro player in duelyst would be “unopro” as he is the one im rooting to win grandmasters…a pro player isnt a tryhard that spends hours and hours on a game. a pro player is one that can spend 2 days of playing from rank 11 and make it to s rank with 80 to 90 percent win rate if not higher

#37

Yeah, you really need a sampling distribution to judge skill in this game :confused:

#38

I can’t believe more people didn’t say this but you didn’t almost beat anyone you just loss.The only way you get to say almost beat some in Duelyst is if you miss lethal and turn around and get punished for that fact.

2 Likes
#39

Its normal to have one or two wins against pro player. Because sometime shit happen ; bad draw or misplay. If you have consistent win against them then you could have been better and can start join the tournament to become one of them :wink:

1 Like
#40

I am not sure how it is for this game, but in magic the gathering, there are plenty of videos made by the best players of the game like Jon Finkel. You can see in those videos that he is an excellent player that thinks ahead and really understands the mechanics of the game. He explains his moves and all that jazz too. Then, in one of his two draft videos, he lost. It came down to a long list of decisions and some luck too, but he lost all the same.

Being good at the game increases your likelihood to win, but it doesn’t mean you are going to crush those other players. Even the pros at a game like starcraft do lose against non-pros. Famously, one of the at the time best players of starcraft 2 lost to a commentator that was going for a very unorthodox play.

They aren’t gods. They are humans with just more time to learn the patterns and mechanics of a game. Duelyst isn’t any different. It should also be said that many pros play decks, but don’t build them. They want to play the best deck out there for a certain meta. Being great at playing the game does not mean you are a genius deckbuilder as well. Those combinations do exist, but being one of these does not imply that you are also the other part.

In a game with high variance like a card game, it is even easier that one would lose to a non-professional due to deck matchups and variance in draws. It’s only in games with low variance that you will get the Bobby Fischers that seem immortal.

4 Likes
#41

By the strictest definition of the term Duelyst doesn’t have any professional players, only some highly competitive ones.