That second transition seemed so ADHD lmao "First, we need to understand how humans really learn: The Large Hadron Collider (or LHC for short) is a GINORMOUS particle accelerator."
Shit doesn't have to be this complicated. We are not scientists but only video game players. I think the main reason "99% of players will NEVER climb" bcos their standards are low. They feed but say it's all right. They give unnecessary info in VC and say it doesn't matter. They waste one of their cooldowns and it's ok. I have 1200 SR cousin who is like this. He plays without headphones, he doesn't care about how he plays and when he loses it always somebody else's fault. But, I understand that not everybody is like this. Some people overanalyze stuff and hyperfocus and that's why they can never catch a good timing in game or react to threats in time. In other words, you gotta find a good mindset. You have to care about the game just enough to not make even smallest mistakes. But you can't care too much or you will start fucking up your mechanics. This is coming from 4k ball player for 10+ seasons on 2 accs. I know that 4k is not that high, but I just don't care enough about OW to try to improve my gameplay. I don't see any reward for this and it's not that fun. At the end of the day I will get fucked by cas and brig even if I play close to perfect. Don't care.
My version after playing years since open beta - some players have initial passive skills(like better multitasking) that helps them to progress faster and more efficiently then others. Not telling you that they're just talented , but their brain already works a bit different for whatever reasons. So other people they need to change how their brain operates first in order to improve. If you are 4k - you're probably one of those guys who have softskills required for high ranks. I mean i have my strong sides , but overwatch is a game that is just impossible for me to beat (3200 is my best result with HUGE efforts and a lot of time invested), because my brain just bad at multitasking - i m tunneling a lot and its very hard to get rid of it. And maybe you dont have this problem, thus you can focus on other things and able to progress more efficicently.
@@leight9503 There are many factors to success. I was low diamond hardstuck for several seasons. I got a good taste of master and GM ranks after I mained Orisa for 2 seasons when she was OP. I managed to get ~800SR on her with 67% winrate in just 1 season (from 2900 to 3700). That's when I learned how it feels to carry games and what is winning like. You get nearly 0 deaths, you waste 0 cooldowns, you waste 0 health points and you make 0 mistakes. This is how you win games in OW. That's when I got my standards to the very high level. After that it was easy to learn how to play other heroes. You start at low SR and win non stop while making as little mistakes as possible. But, if overpowered Orisa was never a thing I doubt I would have gotten to 4k on ball (and zarya). Your problem is that you overcomplicate things. No need to tear your ass apart to rank up. Just play some easy hero and get a good taste of winning. Try maining Torbjourn, Roadhog or Ana. These heroes play themselves, no need to have 958439053 IQ to play them.
a@@shifty5917 well i had around 60-70% winrate on my main charcters (Zarya/Dva) while climbing from 2100 to 3k, but... it was very hard and after 3000 i hit a wall where my hero just stopped working for me. And i watched a lot of GM streams - no way i could figure it out myself and climb from gold without those streams. It was like 2018-19 - now i cant pass 2700 mark with same character. I had a lot of these winning games, but im not 4k by any means. Btw for me Ana is very mecanically hard hero :D Thats what i mentioned before - i probably miss some softskills you have, so my time spent in the game is far less efficient than yours. Overwatch is just not my game to shine. In the other hand im pretty good with strategy games - so i guess its about personal traits.
Luck describes a factor of low probability. The less likely the outcome, the less probable the chance. If you have to be reeeealy lucky to pull something off, disregard that play unless it's the only play you can make then 100% go for it. No matter how much Luck was involved in a defeat/win result, the outcome is always measurable.
What if engagements are the entire game? Like spawn camping or being spawn camped or someone trickling or 1 person contesting without dying? Most games I play last 15-45 minutes with me getting most objective time in every role I play yet still lose cuz my team won't contest at all or push even with numbers advantage. I hate Silver/Gold Players and people constantly tell me I play like a Plat player
51% climbs. 49% falls. It's all about that extra 1%, getting one extra kill, capturing one extra point, doing that one extra thing in the game that wins a round.
I get the sentiment but this is not true in a competitive setting utilizing ELO or Glicko-2. For example, I climbed from 2340 to 3986 with Soldier at a 46% winrate in Season 6 of OW. The nature of MMR distribution is predominantly predictive - the algorithm already has an idea of what team will win before the match starts. If you lose against a team that was projected to win, you lose less SR and vice versa. There are a lot of things that affect this. You can easily drop SR while maintaining a positive win rate. It can be pretty frustrating.
@@runeyugi I'm explaining how ELO/Glicko works. I am 1000% certain the devs did not say, "winrate is all that matters." Because it absolutely does not and I have personally discussed this with engineers on Team 4. If you want to climb in Overwatch you need to win valuable games. Valuable games are when a ranked match loads up and the other teams cumulative SR is higher than yours. The more you deviate from the predictions the algorithm makes the more SR you get. In this system, it is completely normal for you to climb uninterrupted while losing more than you win. That is how it works. It has nothing to do with performance-based stats.
@@runeyugi if you're confused by what I'm talking about, or what "predictions" I'm referring to, look up a video explaining the ELO algorithm. It is entirely predicated on standard deviation. Learning how it works will benefit you in your competitive journey.
I began this Game in bronce, first FPS of my life, at the age of around 24. With a lot of time and practice I climbed to master. I had a 1y and a half stop due to personal factors and I am back. I know I am around a high Diamond player. I know I most likely wont climb much more but I am fine with that. I dont have as much time to train and improve as I had, but I keep playing daily and I am taking back some aim i Lost during the time I stopped. The only difference beetween me and other Friends that have not improve its that I took It seriously. I consumed high level players, tutorials. I jumped into custom games to try and improve. I reviewd my own games to know what I did worng and what not to do again. I got into teams during a short while to understand better the Game and improve with a pseudo coach. All of this and I wasnt that much of a rank player. I played rank only when I felt like It. I stopped when I Lost and I didnt feel on my top condition. I am "old" compare to a lot of the higher level players. i didnt come with the instintual knowledge on other games similar. Everything is hard work and motivation. I may not be the Best player but I am proud of my journey and I Will keep trying to improve even if I know my limits and I know I wont be that top 500 player. But learning and focusing on myself its how you improve. If thats what you want to do.
You can get to top 500. Age can be a limiting factor in pro play, but not really till like mid 30’s and even then you can still be the top of ranked no matter how old you are. The reason older players at that level is rare is because most people get busy and don’t have the time anymore. If you can put in an hour or two every single day gm is a realistic goal no matter your age :)
Problem is - overwatch is(or rather 'was') very hard game to analyse. Its one of the most unintuitive pvp game ever, so its very easy to get wrong with conclusions.
@@widcree7619 No the Overwatch rank distribution statistics were released by Blizzard at some point, and it was actually revealed to be 1%! I'm not sure if it's changed since then though
No need to worry the games about as dead as it can get , if you can remotely play any shooting game decently you’ll get past 2500 in overwatch, climbing in a 6v6 is not 50/50 skill and time it’s 80% time 20% skill it’s a coin flip game lol, don’t be demotivated just know there’s nothing that should even remotely motivate you to want to play and climb in overwatch … it’s done it’s over it’s gone . (Retired player 4700 peak. Dps / off tank player)
That second transition seemed so ADHD lmao
"First, we need to understand how humans really learn: The Large Hadron Collider (or LHC for short) is a GINORMOUS particle accelerator."
Also, at 3:37 it says "WIN GOOD, LOVE BAD", which is either a typo or a subtle joke
LOOOL
"Win good, love bad" -ioStux Jan 28th, 2022
basically, throw shit at the wall and see what sticks
Shit doesn't have to be this complicated. We are not scientists but only video game players.
I think the main reason "99% of players will NEVER climb" bcos their standards are low. They feed but say it's all right. They give unnecessary info in VC and say it doesn't matter. They waste one of their cooldowns and it's ok. I have 1200 SR cousin who is like this. He plays without headphones, he doesn't care about how he plays and when he loses it always somebody else's fault.
But, I understand that not everybody is like this. Some people overanalyze stuff and hyperfocus and that's why they can never catch a good timing in game or react to threats in time.
In other words, you gotta find a good mindset. You have to care about the game just enough to not make even smallest mistakes. But you can't care too much or you will start fucking up your mechanics.
This is coming from 4k ball player for 10+ seasons on 2 accs. I know that 4k is not that high, but I just don't care enough about OW to try to improve my gameplay. I don't see any reward for this and it's not that fun. At the end of the day I will get fucked by cas and brig even if I play close to perfect. Don't care.
@@zidawn-alex Lol, I am just practicing my English. It's not my native language.
My version after playing years since open beta - some players have initial passive skills(like better multitasking) that helps them to progress faster and more efficiently then others.
Not telling you that they're just talented , but their brain already works a bit different for whatever reasons. So other people they need to change how their brain operates first in order to improve.
If you are 4k - you're probably one of those guys who have softskills required for high ranks.
I mean i have my strong sides , but overwatch is a game that is just impossible for me to beat (3200 is my best result with HUGE efforts and a lot of time invested), because my brain just bad at multitasking - i m tunneling a lot and its very hard to get rid of it. And maybe you dont have this problem, thus you can focus on other things and able to progress more efficicently.
@@leight9503 There are many factors to success.
I was low diamond hardstuck for several seasons. I got a good taste of master and GM ranks after I mained Orisa for 2 seasons when she was OP. I managed to get ~800SR on her with 67% winrate in just 1 season (from 2900 to 3700).
That's when I learned how it feels to carry games and what is winning like.
You get nearly 0 deaths, you waste 0 cooldowns, you waste 0 health points and you make 0 mistakes. This is how you win games in OW. That's when I got my standards to the very high level.
After that it was easy to learn how to play other heroes. You start at low SR and win non stop while making as little mistakes as possible.
But, if overpowered Orisa was never a thing I doubt I would have gotten to 4k on ball (and zarya).
Your problem is that you overcomplicate things. No need to tear your ass apart to rank up. Just play some easy hero and get a good taste of winning. Try maining Torbjourn, Roadhog or Ana. These heroes play themselves, no need to have 958439053 IQ to play them.
a@@shifty5917 well i had around 60-70% winrate on my main charcters (Zarya/Dva) while climbing from 2100 to 3k, but... it was very hard and after 3000 i hit a wall where my hero just stopped working for me. And i watched a lot of GM streams - no way i could figure it out myself and climb from gold without those streams.
It was like 2018-19 - now i cant pass 2700 mark with same character. I had a lot of these winning games, but im not 4k by any means. Btw for me Ana is very mecanically hard hero :D
Thats what i mentioned before - i probably miss some softskills you have, so my time spent in the game is far less efficient than
yours. Overwatch is just not my game to shine.
In the other hand im pretty good with strategy games - so i guess its about personal traits.
You just needed a right environment.
0:28 i think he spoke to eathlete's marketings manager
Thanks for your video, it is really helpful even for a non-overwatch player like me
FPS, Ping, or Jesus. XDDD
eye yo stucks video game teacher upload lets goooo
250 years of iostux coaching per second, sounds like a new american unit for time measurement
While I like the idea, it seems to rely a lot on serendipity -- getting lucky and noticing a pattern or not.
Luck describes a factor of low probability. The less likely the outcome, the less probable the chance. If you have to be reeeealy lucky to pull something off, disregard that play unless it's the only play you can make then 100% go for it. No matter how much Luck was involved in a defeat/win result, the outcome is always measurable.
It’s a good thing your brain is wired for pattern recognition. If you see something enough times it will pop out for you.
What if engagements are the entire game? Like spawn camping or being spawn camped or someone trickling or 1 person contesting without dying? Most games I play last 15-45 minutes with me getting most objective time in every role I play yet still lose cuz my team won't contest at all or push even with numbers advantage.
I hate Silver/Gold Players and people constantly tell me I play like a Plat player
cope
perfect timing. great as always.
❤️
4:06 Nice lmfao
first
edit: 'jesus' lol
51% climbs. 49% falls. It's all about that extra 1%, getting one extra kill, capturing one extra point, doing that one extra thing in the game that wins a round.
I get the sentiment but this is not true in a competitive setting utilizing ELO or Glicko-2. For example, I climbed from 2340 to 3986 with Soldier at a 46% winrate in Season 6 of OW. The nature of MMR distribution is predominantly predictive - the algorithm already has an idea of what team will win before the match starts. If you lose against a team that was projected to win, you lose less SR and vice versa.
There are a lot of things that affect this. You can easily drop SR while maintaining a positive win rate. It can be pretty frustrating.
@@nickjklol According to the devs there is no performance based mmr gains. Just winrate.
@@runeyugi that doesn't have anything to do with what I'm saying.
@@runeyugi I'm explaining how ELO/Glicko works. I am 1000% certain the devs did not say, "winrate is all that matters." Because it absolutely does not and I have personally discussed this with engineers on Team 4.
If you want to climb in Overwatch you need to win valuable games. Valuable games are when a ranked match loads up and the other teams cumulative SR is higher than yours. The more you deviate from the predictions the algorithm makes the more SR you get. In this system, it is completely normal for you to climb uninterrupted while losing more than you win. That is how it works. It has nothing to do with performance-based stats.
@@runeyugi if you're confused by what I'm talking about, or what "predictions" I'm referring to, look up a video explaining the ELO algorithm. It is entirely predicated on standard deviation. Learning how it works will benefit you in your competitive journey.
Noice. New video
I began this Game in bronce, first FPS of my life, at the age of around 24. With a lot of time and practice I climbed to master. I had a 1y and a half stop due to personal factors and I am back. I know I am around a high Diamond player. I know I most likely wont climb much more but I am fine with that. I dont have as much time to train and improve as I had, but I keep playing daily and I am taking back some aim i Lost during the time I stopped.
The only difference beetween me and other Friends that have not improve its that I took It seriously. I consumed high level players, tutorials. I jumped into custom games to try and improve. I reviewd my own games to know what I did worng and what not to do again. I got into teams during a short while to understand better the Game and improve with a pseudo coach.
All of this and I wasnt that much of a rank player. I played rank only when I felt like It. I stopped when I Lost and I didnt feel on my top condition.
I am "old" compare to a lot of the higher level players. i didnt come with the instintual knowledge on other games similar. Everything is hard work and motivation. I may not be the Best player but I am proud of my journey and I Will keep trying to improve even if I know my limits and I know I wont be that top 500 player.
But learning and focusing on myself its how you improve. If thats what you want to do.
You can get to top 500. Age can be a limiting factor in pro play, but not really till like mid 30’s and even then you can still be the top of ranked no matter how old you are. The reason older players at that level is rare is because most people get busy and don’t have the time anymore. If you can put in an hour or two every single day gm is a realistic goal no matter your age :)
4:07 5:47
Lmao 😂 “reinstall the game”.
Problem is - overwatch is(or rather 'was') very hard game to analyse. Its one of the most unintuitive pvp game ever, so its very easy to get wrong with conclusions.
99% of players? where do you get the stat for 99% xd
I think he's talking about those that make it to high elo, since most people get stuck in mid to low elo forever.
Pretty sure only one percent of players are gm
@@Luke-rx1zu way less
@@widcree7619 No the Overwatch rank distribution statistics were released by Blizzard at some point, and it was actually revealed to be 1%! I'm not sure if it's changed since then though
Haven't watched the video but the title seems really dumb and demotivating
Gotta become a part of the 1%!
No need to worry the games about as dead as it can get , if you can remotely play any shooting game decently you’ll get past 2500 in overwatch, climbing in a 6v6 is not 50/50 skill and time it’s 80% time 20% skill it’s a coin flip game lol, don’t be demotivated just know there’s nothing that should even remotely motivate you to want to play and climb in overwatch … it’s done it’s over it’s gone . (Retired player 4700 peak. Dps / off tank player)