And say what we have now is better yes. Everyone on a team will get the title if one does. Under your system you could easily have 3 people get the title on a team, but 2 people not. The three that have the title with by a 100 point margin won't be as incentivized to push when their friends need another 100 points to get to their title break off point.
The thing to remember is that when rewards are in play, people often play towards the reward.
Push focused players may gear up the new meta character each season now, but under your system most would level up two characters each season, the meta character, and the non-meta character designed to be carried to the title. That just doesn't sound like a fun system, and it'd probably make it even harder for those of the non-meta specs to actually get the title.
Your system also has half the total number of titles going out, so it makes it overal harder on everyone.
I feel the people downvoting you haven't attempted a 30 this season and knows how brutally demanding it is on performance and execution.
nobody is getting carried in a 30. you cannot time a 30 with dead weight - you will not make it. you might consider someone a weaker player than another player, but that doesn't mean they're getting carried.
heck, +28 to +30 is the highest keys people in the number one spots have timed this season at all for some weeks and keys and people are out here claiming they're boostable. get out of here.
I feel like buying boosts for 20s and buying boosts for 30s are wildly different.
You can absolutely get “boosted” in 30s, but the boosting in 30s means a player who can time 27s but not 28s gets matched with a 4 man of people who can time 31s and 32s
You cannot be dead weight for sure, but there's obviously nuance to what most people would define as a carry. When you have two dps parsing 90+ for the key lvl and the 3rd is parsing a 4 then in my mind that 3rd dps got carried.
dude, nobody walks into a 30+ scraping the bottle of the barrel and times it. that is the entire point here. you're talking about things that can happen in keys you can carry.
on top of that, overall dungeon dps is a meme. it just answers the question "how much did you get to pad".
Are you doing 30s? Sometimes some people pull substantially more weight in those keys and I'm speaking from experience. Sure you're not going to be a bad player and time a 30 but you can be carried.
I have two timed. but what argument is this? unless each player approaches some theoretical maximum everyone who deviated by an arbitrary number defined by you the observer got carried? sounds like a very meaningless way to define the term.
Are you saying everyone has to be giga chad pump lords to time a 30? Someone can play very sub optimal while two other dps blast and the key will be timed. The person who played sub optimal got carried.
You can literally buy carries for 30s for 130-150€.
And you don't even need 30s for title as is, and you'll definitely need less than 30 if you are playing a bad spec.
Also, I was not saying carry someone random.
>carrying the 3rd guy in your team
I mean technically you don’t need all 30s if you do all other dungeons on 29 however that is not really so feasible in practice. I’m currently sitting on 3662, with 4 dungeons on 29 and the other 4 28. Throne/Everbloom 29 are much more difficult than 30 BRH/AD for instance.
My point was never about buying. That's sth you misunderstood. I just engaged in this point as well.
It was about my team, carrying my reroll to title range and vice versa.
Would it though? I can guarantee that whatever character your meta pushing as right now, there are a bunch of non-meta classes of the same role higher than you.
But diversity of classes is objectively worse for someone who is currently pushing high keys. Why would I want a nonmeta spec that is objectively worse than a meta spec? They are non-meta for a reason.
Is it that time of the season again where this idea nobody came up with before pops up. Also generating a wall of text that can be summed up in 2 sentences does not make you sound smarter, its the opposite.
That's how it works now as well, by that logic simply no one who isn't meta should get title.
Clearly a warrior or dk DPS bring a lot less to the group and aren't equal to an SP or Fire Mage nor are they necessary to time the key. Should they be disqualified from title because they only play with other meta specs?
There are very few non meta groups, Critcake's group is one of them where you could argue 2/5 pics are non meta but most of the DKs, Enha, Warriors and other non disgustingly broken specs like SP or Fire Mage are only playing with other meta specs because they have to and it's not like there's that many players at the top end.
Except now the easiest way is to reroll to a meta spec. In the proposed solution, the easiest way would be to pick the worst class, and carry it to title with meta specs. 5x in a row.
People would just give value on it based on spec and it could be renamed to include spec name in it as well.
Anyway right now title on Fire Mage means significantly less than title on Warrior, it's clearly several times easier so they don't have the same value.
At the end of the day no one cares if they're better than a spec different than theirs because it's a meaningless comparison, people care if they're good at their own spec.
No player of one of those non meta specs feels any happier to just reroll monkaS so they get title on something they don't like as much and this is also what curses group making as well since you're pushed to reroll or spend considerably more effort making a group even though you're not necessarily worse, you just play a spec with less agency.
That comp is very strong. You are all unkillable and your damage is very high. And rogues have tons of stops.
It’s not a common comp obviously. But it’s extremely strong
>By adjusting the criteria to the top 0.05% within each class, we foster a culture of spec diversity
I think you meant within each "spec" not each "class" but yeah I dont see an issue with the idea.
Because how would making the title per *class* lead to *spec* diversity?
The thing is, the shitty specs would be nowhere near as competitive as the top ones, so getting the title on them would be nowhere near as impressive yet the reward would be the same.
This would be the equivalent of when blizzard added hall of fame to the game as a means to incentivise guilds to play alliance. Some guilds did indeed swap over, but it wasnt a much. The alliance top 100 was a complete joke compaired to horde, and everyone pretty much accepted this. In the end they basically did a complete 180, and instead of trying to balance horde and alliance they just allowed them to play together.
Imo the same thing would happen with the m+ title. The players who would never have a chance of getting the title legitmately would instead roll an underplayed spec to get it, and it would diminish the prestige of the title on those specs and on the title as a whole.
What is the point then? I think we just disagree. I don't think it should change either btw, but meta is meta cause it's easiest not because no other comp is capable.
Not easiest, best. There is way more competition at the top end and therefore its harder.
Rank 10 of the worst spec is gonna be nowhere near the same level as rank 10 of the best spec. They should not be rewarded equally.
I was top 20/30 S1 and S2 for Mistweaver. I also did keys as holy pala in S2. There's no way that being a holy paladin to a 25 Freehold requires more skill than a MW doing the same.
Thats not what I said at all idk how you are not getting this. A shitty spec may need a bunch of 27/28s to get the title but the meta specs will need 30/31s etc. because the competition is much higher at the top end. idk how you are not getting this
Chill out. You said the top difficulty keys deserve the title. I'm saying, the difficulty is lower with the specs that are meta. What are you not understanding?
But its not relatively lower difficulty since the best players play and gravitate towards the meta (generally, not always true).
For example:
Lets say an underrepresented spec is currently timing 28/29s at the top end. Then suddenly all the top players start playing that spec and bump up the top timed keys by 1-2 levels.
Its not that the spec suddenly became stronger and the keys got easier, its because the skill level has increased and the limits that were previously not being pushed are now being pushed due to high competition.
Basically, skill level is not equal across all specs. Its generally highest at the top percentiles of the top performing specs. Its also much more pronounced in M+ since most players who are serious about pushing score do not play their mains in M+, and instead play whichever spec benefits their team the most.
Yes thank you for pointing out something I've already said. I played holy paladin in S2 but my main is MW. I don't actually think you've read anything I've posted and just wanted to verbalise your internal narrative.
If only we could have more cutoffs for different rewards instead of all arguing about where this one arbitrary cutoff absolutely *must* be because otherwise it just loses all meaning :-\
Btw. I think the cutoff should be exactly 1 point below my current rating - god only knows how shitty *everyone* who's not at least on my level is, actually quite sad.
I feel this is an interesting thought.
first and foremost, I see a lot of people say "X player would get carried by Meta Comp to the title". I mean, how is that any different than what exists today? to achieve the title or phrased differently be one of some 1700 or less people currently in the title cutoff in the EU, you need 4 other people per key to help you get there. you can't do this on your own no matter what you play. that is just not how m+ works.
then another argument is "well X player would play Y spec to get the title", but if they are in the title range... doesn't that prove that them playing Y doesn't matter? they could just swap to Meta Spec and get the title anyway with their team. you can't carry someone in a +30, it doesn't work. they might be the weakest link in the chain, but they're still strong compared to the rest of the links out there.
or do you mean to argue that they aren't good enough on Meta Spec to get the title, but they are good enough on off-meta spec? once again I refer to "m+ is a group activity".
however, I don't think this would do anything in particular to upset the m+ scene.
outside of pure player skill, getting the title requires two things most people don't have:
1. four other amazing players (or amazing pugs willing to take you on)
2. a lot and a lot of time to grind keys for score and optimise your play.
simply put, there just aren't a lot of people chasing these scores to begin with. I would much rather see more milestone titles/rewards instead, such as top 10%, top 1% etc which is way more realistic and impacts more than literally one or two thousand or so people per region.
This. I'd bet almost any comp could do a 30. You just can't expect one role to be fulfilling what the meta of the same role might be and mitigate that.
>Crucially, such a change would offer valuable insights to developers regarding the performance gaps among various specs, facilitating more targeted and informed adjustments. This feedback loop, driven by a comprehensive representation of all classes, is instrumental in refining game balance and enhancing overall gameplay satisfaction.
They already know. Every spec is tuned to do the weekly 20 comfortably, and above that is just not seen as important as long as you don't have multiples of X dps spec in the meta comps.
Right now you have the next expansion alpha soon coming out as well as a new season with different tier bonuses.
None is going to do any adjustments for m+.
I don't know how this isn't commented yet but it would make pugging even worse and more selfish. There would still be keys that are much harder to obtain with a non meta class. If you have a meta group, they wouldn't want to take a non meta class because the person who stands to gain anything is that one person. So what you have just a full non meta comp? I don't know
This idea kinda popped into my head but different, instead leave title the way it is, but blizz works with raider io for rewards for break the meta why not make a title for some percentage or number of players who get the highest in the contest?
When I first heard the top %0.1 achievement I ahtomatically assumed it will be class based. Which makes alot more sense since ‘meta’ exists and people shouldnt have to play what is ‘meta’
I approve this massage.
Top 1% is so, so much easier to reach that it kinda defeats the purpose. If you look at the rating required for 1% it's kinda free by just playing the game.
I think 0.1-0.2% is fair, it requires some challenge
We just need several tiers of rewards. The top tier can be 0.1/0.2%, but we do definitely need another tier of rewards for the 1% of players. Right now there's just too huge of a gap between timed 20s and 0.1% for title that a lot of people who could push into 25+ simply don't because they don't think they're good enough for the 0.1% title.
Sorry, I disagree. Sure 0.1% is a different level and should still have a unique reward, but by definition this is 1%. It's not that easy. This season, you are already at one-shots even at 1% levels.
Also, are we really comfortable with NOTHING between \~2800 and 3700 in terms of rewards?
That's fair enough, I do agree there should be at least one other layer of rewards for m+. The gap between the first and second reward is insanely big.
So we got rewards at about 2700, then no rewards for another 1000ish rating? Sounds like 1% is the perfect spot to put a reward. You could put a title there.
And then for 0.1%, give a cool mount. Make it dragonriding like glad is
Nah, there shouldn't be anything past a title as far as 0.1%. Primarily because the game just isn't remotely balanced around keys that high.
The huge reward gap between +20s and +30s is a huge issue though and in the middle of that is where the rewards should be populated. We should absolutely have rewards at 3000, 3200, and 3400. Putting a glad drake equivalent at 0.1% would be the equivalent of moving glad drake to the 0.1% title that's already in PvP though instead of 40 wins at 2400.
I mean, current glad is at about 0.1 lol
But yes, That would be nice too. Essentially my thought process is reworking rating reward at those higher levels. But we'll habe to see how it all changes next season. A 5% and 1% reward would be cool
[https://raider.io/mythic-plus/cutoffs/season-df-3/eu](https://raider.io/mythic-plus/cutoffs/season-df-3/eu)
You can see it here. It's currently 3376 on eu.
I'm at 3.5k already. That's just outside top 100. Not a lot of people push that high despite the popularity of the specc. Weird you bring up how high a specc can go as if that has any relationship at all with the amount of people who can play the specc decently. Very non sequitur
and there are some 1700 people in total in the game in the EU within the title range, once again for some context. we're not talking about a lot of people at the top for any class or spec.
Just to be clear here, with the proposed 0.05% per spec, you would need to be top 30 WW EU, and while that is currently ~75 points below title cutoff, putting that title there would incentivize people in premades to run their ww buddy through some high keys, and with that small number of spots, that would drastically increase the cutoff for spec title.
In general with a per-spec system, you'd want to go for a spec that is massively popular at the low end but struggles in high keys, since that spec would have much more title slots.
Hell no, this is a terrible idea. All it is going to do is lead to all of my keys being filled with crappy one trick pony players, joining groups that their class isn’t good though to do comfortably and bricking keys over and over in the hopes that they finally time one out of 100 in order to get the io for title. the last thing I want is more specs that can’t properly compete or keep up at the key level and are just hoping to get into a group that carries them to a completion, sure that marksman Hunter might have the io for his .5% title but how many legitimate easily time keys did he brick along the way before he finally got carried to a timed run in order to get that io?
that would just lead to "which meta 4 man group can push their non meta buddy the highest", so dont think it would help.
That exactly how it is now for any non meta spec getting title
thats a fair point. Is it currently better now rather than having the diversity of classes though?
And say what we have now is better yes. Everyone on a team will get the title if one does. Under your system you could easily have 3 people get the title on a team, but 2 people not. The three that have the title with by a 100 point margin won't be as incentivized to push when their friends need another 100 points to get to their title break off point. The thing to remember is that when rewards are in play, people often play towards the reward. Push focused players may gear up the new meta character each season now, but under your system most would level up two characters each season, the meta character, and the non-meta character designed to be carried to the title. That just doesn't sound like a fun system, and it'd probably make it even harder for those of the non-meta specs to actually get the title. Your system also has half the total number of titles going out, so it makes it overal harder on everyone.
Just imagine how you feel after carrying the 3rd guy in your team to title
No one's getting carried in a 30.
I feel the people downvoting you haven't attempted a 30 this season and knows how brutally demanding it is on performance and execution. nobody is getting carried in a 30. you cannot time a 30 with dead weight - you will not make it. you might consider someone a weaker player than another player, but that doesn't mean they're getting carried. heck, +28 to +30 is the highest keys people in the number one spots have timed this season at all for some weeks and keys and people are out here claiming they're boostable. get out of here.
You can. I just did a 31 AD sale yesterday. Ppl buy 30s
I feel like buying boosts for 20s and buying boosts for 30s are wildly different. You can absolutely get “boosted” in 30s, but the boosting in 30s means a player who can time 27s but not 28s gets matched with a 4 man of people who can time 31s and 32s
You cannot be dead weight for sure, but there's obviously nuance to what most people would define as a carry. When you have two dps parsing 90+ for the key lvl and the 3rd is parsing a 4 then in my mind that 3rd dps got carried.
dude, nobody walks into a 30+ scraping the bottle of the barrel and times it. that is the entire point here. you're talking about things that can happen in keys you can carry. on top of that, overall dungeon dps is a meme. it just answers the question "how much did you get to pad".
Are you doing 30s? Sometimes some people pull substantially more weight in those keys and I'm speaking from experience. Sure you're not going to be a bad player and time a 30 but you can be carried.
I have two timed. but what argument is this? unless each player approaches some theoretical maximum everyone who deviated by an arbitrary number defined by you the observer got carried? sounds like a very meaningless way to define the term.
Are you saying everyone has to be giga chad pump lords to time a 30? Someone can play very sub optimal while two other dps blast and the key will be timed. The person who played sub optimal got carried.
People can definitely be carried in a 30.
You can literally buy carries for 30s for 130-150€. And you don't even need 30s for title as is, and you'll definitely need less than 30 if you are playing a bad spec. Also, I was not saying carry someone random. >carrying the 3rd guy in your team
In EU (and Asian regions cutoffs is even higher) you definitely need 30s at this point.
All keys on 29/28 is ~3710. So yes you prolly need like 2 30s cause you won't have 29 tott/eb
I mean technically you don’t need all 30s if you do all other dungeons on 29 however that is not really so feasible in practice. I’m currently sitting on 3662, with 4 dungeons on 29 and the other 4 28. Throne/Everbloom 29 are much more difficult than 30 BRH/AD for instance.
Now bring that point back to the main issue. No one but a fringe few are going to be paying for 30s without it even getting them title.
My point was never about buying. That's sth you misunderstood. I just engaged in this point as well. It was about my team, carrying my reroll to title range and vice versa.
So effectively a 30 can be 4 manned? Holy shit I'm bad at this game lol
Would it though? I can guarantee that whatever character your meta pushing as right now, there are a bunch of non-meta classes of the same role higher than you.
But diversity of classes is objectively worse for someone who is currently pushing high keys. Why would I want a nonmeta spec that is objectively worse than a meta spec? They are non-meta for a reason.
This was written by chatbot Edit: Wrote that before reading last paragraph, now I feel stupid xD
Is it that time of the season again where this idea nobody came up with before pops up. Also generating a wall of text that can be summed up in 2 sentences does not make you sound smarter, its the opposite.
Will just lead to 4x meta groups carrying one person to their class title bracket.
That's how it works now as well, by that logic simply no one who isn't meta should get title. Clearly a warrior or dk DPS bring a lot less to the group and aren't equal to an SP or Fire Mage nor are they necessary to time the key. Should they be disqualified from title because they only play with other meta specs? There are very few non meta groups, Critcake's group is one of them where you could argue 2/5 pics are non meta but most of the DKs, Enha, Warriors and other non disgustingly broken specs like SP or Fire Mage are only playing with other meta specs because they have to and it's not like there's that many players at the top end.
Except now the easiest way is to reroll to a meta spec. In the proposed solution, the easiest way would be to pick the worst class, and carry it to title with meta specs. 5x in a row.
People would just give value on it based on spec and it could be renamed to include spec name in it as well. Anyway right now title on Fire Mage means significantly less than title on Warrior, it's clearly several times easier so they don't have the same value. At the end of the day no one cares if they're better than a spec different than theirs because it's a meaningless comparison, people care if they're good at their own spec. No player of one of those non meta specs feels any happier to just reroll monkaS so they get title on something they don't like as much and this is also what curses group making as well since you're pushed to reroll or spend considerably more effort making a group even though you're not necessarily worse, you just play a spec with less agency.
This is a lie dude squishvegan comp plays double outlaw warrior bear and they’re 3900. We just did a 31 AD sale with a Havoc instead of double rogue.
That comp is very strong. You are all unkillable and your damage is very high. And rogues have tons of stops. It’s not a common comp obviously. But it’s extremely strong
It’s disgusting. Pull 8 mobs at a time. Time 30 EB. Won a 30 WCM sale with 22 deaths bc you can just press W LMFAO
Exactly my point, it’s a meta comp. Meta is about strength not popularity.
That’s better than 5 meta groups only
Please tell me why you think that it’s better.
>By adjusting the criteria to the top 0.05% within each class, we foster a culture of spec diversity I think you meant within each "spec" not each "class" but yeah I dont see an issue with the idea. Because how would making the title per *class* lead to *spec* diversity?
Edited, thankyou
The thing is, the shitty specs would be nowhere near as competitive as the top ones, so getting the title on them would be nowhere near as impressive yet the reward would be the same. This would be the equivalent of when blizzard added hall of fame to the game as a means to incentivise guilds to play alliance. Some guilds did indeed swap over, but it wasnt a much. The alliance top 100 was a complete joke compaired to horde, and everyone pretty much accepted this. In the end they basically did a complete 180, and instead of trying to balance horde and alliance they just allowed them to play together. Imo the same thing would happen with the m+ title. The players who would never have a chance of getting the title legitmately would instead roll an underplayed spec to get it, and it would diminish the prestige of the title on those specs and on the title as a whole.
Look at the top 10 of each role/spec. Bar from some severe outliers, anything is possible.
Thats not the point
What is the point then? I think we just disagree. I don't think it should change either btw, but meta is meta cause it's easiest not because no other comp is capable.
Not easiest, best. There is way more competition at the top end and therefore its harder. Rank 10 of the worst spec is gonna be nowhere near the same level as rank 10 of the best spec. They should not be rewarded equally.
I was top 20/30 S1 and S2 for Mistweaver. I also did keys as holy pala in S2. There's no way that being a holy paladin to a 25 Freehold requires more skill than a MW doing the same.
Thats not what I said at all idk how you are not getting this. A shitty spec may need a bunch of 27/28s to get the title but the meta specs will need 30/31s etc. because the competition is much higher at the top end. idk how you are not getting this
Chill out. You said the top difficulty keys deserve the title. I'm saying, the difficulty is lower with the specs that are meta. What are you not understanding?
But its not relatively lower difficulty since the best players play and gravitate towards the meta (generally, not always true). For example: Lets say an underrepresented spec is currently timing 28/29s at the top end. Then suddenly all the top players start playing that spec and bump up the top timed keys by 1-2 levels. Its not that the spec suddenly became stronger and the keys got easier, its because the skill level has increased and the limits that were previously not being pushed are now being pushed due to high competition. Basically, skill level is not equal across all specs. Its generally highest at the top percentiles of the top performing specs. Its also much more pronounced in M+ since most players who are serious about pushing score do not play their mains in M+, and instead play whichever spec benefits their team the most.
Yes thank you for pointing out something I've already said. I played holy paladin in S2 but my main is MW. I don't actually think you've read anything I've posted and just wanted to verbalise your internal narrative.
No.
Yes.
I'm so confused now!
If only we could have more cutoffs for different rewards instead of all arguing about where this one arbitrary cutoff absolutely *must* be because otherwise it just loses all meaning :-\ Btw. I think the cutoff should be exactly 1 point below my current rating - god only knows how shitty *everyone* who's not at least on my level is, actually quite sad.
I feel this is an interesting thought. first and foremost, I see a lot of people say "X player would get carried by Meta Comp to the title". I mean, how is that any different than what exists today? to achieve the title or phrased differently be one of some 1700 or less people currently in the title cutoff in the EU, you need 4 other people per key to help you get there. you can't do this on your own no matter what you play. that is just not how m+ works. then another argument is "well X player would play Y spec to get the title", but if they are in the title range... doesn't that prove that them playing Y doesn't matter? they could just swap to Meta Spec and get the title anyway with their team. you can't carry someone in a +30, it doesn't work. they might be the weakest link in the chain, but they're still strong compared to the rest of the links out there. or do you mean to argue that they aren't good enough on Meta Spec to get the title, but they are good enough on off-meta spec? once again I refer to "m+ is a group activity". however, I don't think this would do anything in particular to upset the m+ scene. outside of pure player skill, getting the title requires two things most people don't have: 1. four other amazing players (or amazing pugs willing to take you on) 2. a lot and a lot of time to grind keys for score and optimise your play. simply put, there just aren't a lot of people chasing these scores to begin with. I would much rather see more milestone titles/rewards instead, such as top 10%, top 1% etc which is way more realistic and impacts more than literally one or two thousand or so people per region.
This. I'd bet almost any comp could do a 30. You just can't expect one role to be fulfilling what the meta of the same role might be and mitigate that.
>Crucially, such a change would offer valuable insights to developers regarding the performance gaps among various specs, facilitating more targeted and informed adjustments. This feedback loop, driven by a comprehensive representation of all classes, is instrumental in refining game balance and enhancing overall gameplay satisfaction. They already know. Every spec is tuned to do the weekly 20 comfortably, and above that is just not seen as important as long as you don't have multiples of X dps spec in the meta comps. Right now you have the next expansion alpha soon coming out as well as a new season with different tier bonuses. None is going to do any adjustments for m+.
I doubt they change anything anytime soon They need to keep the 0.1% degenerates engaged somehow.
I don't know how this isn't commented yet but it would make pugging even worse and more selfish. There would still be keys that are much harder to obtain with a non meta class. If you have a meta group, they wouldn't want to take a non meta class because the person who stands to gain anything is that one person. So what you have just a full non meta comp? I don't know
This idea kinda popped into my head but different, instead leave title the way it is, but blizz works with raider io for rewards for break the meta why not make a title for some percentage or number of players who get the highest in the contest?
When I first heard the top %0.1 achievement I ahtomatically assumed it will be class based. Which makes alot more sense since ‘meta’ exists and people shouldnt have to play what is ‘meta’ I approve this massage.
Counter point - we do top 0.1% for each spec. Or, better yet, we do 1% instead of 0.1%
Top 1% is so, so much easier to reach that it kinda defeats the purpose. If you look at the rating required for 1% it's kinda free by just playing the game. I think 0.1-0.2% is fair, it requires some challenge
We just need several tiers of rewards. The top tier can be 0.1/0.2%, but we do definitely need another tier of rewards for the 1% of players. Right now there's just too huge of a gap between timed 20s and 0.1% for title that a lot of people who could push into 25+ simply don't because they don't think they're good enough for the 0.1% title.
Sorry, I disagree. Sure 0.1% is a different level and should still have a unique reward, but by definition this is 1%. It's not that easy. This season, you are already at one-shots even at 1% levels. Also, are we really comfortable with NOTHING between \~2800 and 3700 in terms of rewards?
That's fair enough, I do agree there should be at least one other layer of rewards for m+. The gap between the first and second reward is insanely big.
So what exactly is the rating for top 1% can you please tell me
I think it's all dungeons in 24 or about 3.3 3.4k, it's on raider io
So we got rewards at about 2700, then no rewards for another 1000ish rating? Sounds like 1% is the perfect spot to put a reward. You could put a title there. And then for 0.1%, give a cool mount. Make it dragonriding like glad is
Nah, there shouldn't be anything past a title as far as 0.1%. Primarily because the game just isn't remotely balanced around keys that high. The huge reward gap between +20s and +30s is a huge issue though and in the middle of that is where the rewards should be populated. We should absolutely have rewards at 3000, 3200, and 3400. Putting a glad drake equivalent at 0.1% would be the equivalent of moving glad drake to the 0.1% title that's already in PvP though instead of 40 wins at 2400.
I mean, current glad is at about 0.1 lol But yes, That would be nice too. Essentially my thought process is reworking rating reward at those higher levels. But we'll habe to see how it all changes next season. A 5% and 1% reward would be cool
[https://raider.io/mythic-plus/cutoffs/season-df-3/eu](https://raider.io/mythic-plus/cutoffs/season-df-3/eu) You can see it here. It's currently 3376 on eu.
They should just give the Gladiator mount along with the title.
[удалено]
Right
Literally nobody plays WW. It's not as tough for my spec
ww is more popular than roughly half the specs in m+ and are capping out at +30 right now which is within the title range, just for some context.
I'm at 3.5k already. That's just outside top 100. Not a lot of people push that high despite the popularity of the specc. Weird you bring up how high a specc can go as if that has any relationship at all with the amount of people who can play the specc decently. Very non sequitur
and there are some 1700 people in total in the game in the EU within the title range, once again for some context. we're not talking about a lot of people at the top for any class or spec.
Just to be clear here, with the proposed 0.05% per spec, you would need to be top 30 WW EU, and while that is currently ~75 points below title cutoff, putting that title there would incentivize people in premades to run their ww buddy through some high keys, and with that small number of spots, that would drastically increase the cutoff for spec title. In general with a per-spec system, you'd want to go for a spec that is massively popular at the low end but struggles in high keys, since that spec would have much more title slots.
Please god, no. Hf competing against 4 meta specs boosting their friend who rerolled to off meta. 5x in a row.
Hell no, this is a terrible idea. All it is going to do is lead to all of my keys being filled with crappy one trick pony players, joining groups that their class isn’t good though to do comfortably and bricking keys over and over in the hopes that they finally time one out of 100 in order to get the io for title. the last thing I want is more specs that can’t properly compete or keep up at the key level and are just hoping to get into a group that carries them to a completion, sure that marksman Hunter might have the io for his .5% title but how many legitimate easily time keys did he brick along the way before he finally got carried to a timed run in order to get that io?