There is mostly none indeed. There is some improvements of skill of course, e.g. the higher the rank, the better is GPM, XPM, hero meta is shifted towards stronger heroes. Also I'd say warding is another big difference.
But in general, yes, Dota is not what it was 10 years ago. Even in 2k MMR now players know the basics and use everything - smokes, dusts, wards, stacks, blocks, pulls, creep aggro, etc. That's why it's much harder to climb now than 5 years ago, for example. You have to be *much, MUCH* better than your rank to consistently win more games. Moreover, because of unbalanced matchmaking, you can have 2 completely different games by skill level on the same rating. So generally speaking, yeah, 2k-4k is the same skill players.
I still remember years ago when I stomped 2K with one hero pool and the same build every game. Everyone has their own playstyle. Without thinking about meta or something. It was stupid, yet fun.
even in herald they aren't so bad as all the youtube videos you see. i think there's like 2 separate pools to be honest. those that know the game and mechanics, and those who are really braindead.
^Below 2.5k, players lack the basic ability to read and if they can read, then they lack the ability to process that information, since most of these dogs skip school to play games and it shows.
Just play heroes that don't standout much and you just win games, since the idiots lack any awareness to notice chip damage heroes.
it's super weird but as an archon 1, whenever I go party with my herald friends (enemy's rank will be like heralds-guardians) most of the time we lose! I mean some heralds though they're not smurfs, they look really experienced and play very good considering their rank which is the lowest.
That's just matchmaking.
If you are archon 1 in a game of heralds, unless enemy has same composition, you are in a game where scenario is like this:
1 archon + 4 heralds vs 5 Guardians/Crusaders.
The matchmaking is decided around you, the game assumes you will be stomping.
If you are not stomping there's only few reasons
1) You are not trying your best. (copium- else you wouldn't be complaining).
2) Your mmr is higher than you deserve.
Also, as i mentioned before, below 2.5k, there's not much difference in the skills. If you ever climb above 2.8k, you will notice a substantial difference in players knowledge.
Suddenly, simple game mechanic abuse stop giving you free wins.
There's a reason why, first pick huskar/meepo/morph doesn't work after 3.5k. At that level, first picking those cheese heroes is just throwing the game.
When I party queued with my herald friend, I win those games with support heroes having less than 50 cs in 30 mins. Somehow, if a herald carry has a high mmr support on mic, who gives them live advice on what to make, where to stand, when to attack/retreat they suddenly can carry those games fairly easily.
Having fallen from legend to crusader I seem to remember legend being much more aware of what the meta is and playing (and inventing!) creative stuff that nonetheless works far FAR better than average. Drafting was also generally understood at that level and picks were smart and worked together. Crusaders play whatever the fuck they please especially the stuff that doesn't work or doesn't fit the circumstances. Teamwork was also much more implicit at the higher levels. Not working as a team never happened in legend, everything from item choices to timings to location was spot on. Even archons stuck together and aggressively tried to not step on each others toes. Crusaders are more solo fuck my team style with a very low level of co-ordination both in the little things and the big things. When I was still legend, I distinctly remember keeping my eyes on and working with my team actively on whatever they were doing and actively fueling their attempts in whatever ways I could. I also very much knew the meta better as a legend. At the end of the day it's also just a question of higher precision period. The little mistakes do add up over time since they do cause inefficiency, ergo lose games.
if u cannot see the difference, it is becauuse you have poor observational and analytical skills. there is a great difference in how players play in each bracket.
Years ago playing in 2k was much simpler. I remember stomping hard, same thing in 3k. Usually when he lost it was because of impatience. With very few mechanics or abuse of heroes that you knew of, it could be achieved. I remember that with medium viper I always played tryhard with Q was to stomp.
The heroes change and the knowledge of the heroes also. Today it is very easy to have information on how to play a Hero, how to defend yourself, what mechanics to exploit, even demons, even by pressing a key you know WHEN to make a stack, the marked stun times appear and even the shields to synchronize attacks or avoid making them. With more tools and facilities and information the game becomes more exploitable for everyone.
Perhaps one between the Crusader-Arconte-Leyenda when playing the line, no differences are noticed when the heroes they know the most play. But if you notice the difference in how the spaces that exist or those that must be recovered are grouped or managed.
In one of my games yesterday, my support 4 preferred farming to taking group targets, maybe in his head thinking "I'm an ancient, I can participate with an ulti". and no, I don't mean being the one involved in creating the play, but directly not going with your other 4 teammates who use Smoke , take a t2, and steal Dire's shard and simply farm for free.
Also something notorious is that there is more resilience in a Legend than in an Archon or Crusader in general. Also in how to build.
Lütfen yorum yapmak için giriş yapınız
I cant tell the difference. Most of the times crusader is harder than legend. Especially if you play party.
They use smoke, get rosh, and even block and stack camps. The only difference between them is crusader never consider buy bkb before 30 min.
I have 3 alter account btw. Each on crusader, archon, and legend. My main was divine 4, but i dont use it anymore.