MastersForum

Quoted

Before you scoff, maybe you should consider this:

Since cuetech began recording ratings, 175,751 people have played a game of supremacy. Now, I'm sure that number would be at least 50-100,000+ higher if you included those that played before cuetech started, or those that signed up to ESO but didn't play a game.

Out of all of those players, only 1050 people (or thereabouts) are 2k+. That means that only 0.59% of players get to 2k.

Now surely this represents a very exclusive club of skilled players. Think of the 175,000-odd people that aren't 2k.

It's an even more exclusive club in DM. Only 0.2% of DM players reach 2k.

--------------------

I know someone at least will reply along the lines of "even for those people that suck, they can just play heaps of games giving them 1 point to get 2k eventually".

Well, thats true. But I'm sure that at least 75% of the 2k players got there by beating at least some good people. And most people who stay 2k deserve to be 2k.

--------------------

So where is all of this going? It would be good if someone could go check the ratings of previous Age games and see what percentage of the total players are 2k. THEN and only then can we say which game is "easier" to get good at.

Quoted

Original von ZwerGOrca
Nein es ist nicht zu leicht, sondern in anderen Spielen ist es zu schwer !
Durch Smurfs und Cheater wird das Bild der tatsächlichen Spielstärke in anderen Spielen verfälscht (in dem Sinne, dass man für 1600 viel besser sein muss als der Durchschnitts Gelegenheitsspieler).
Da das bei AoE3 im wesentlichen wegfällt hat man auch zurecht relativ hohe Ratings wenn man besser ist als 'Joe Normalo'.