This might be the breaking news in the near future. I do not mean to be rude but I would like to point out the grave flaw of the deathmatch mode.
I have come across several level 35+ players who play .. umm ... very very bad (sorry but that's the truth). What's up with that? In order to confirm whether they are playing for fun (with rainbow decks, archaic cards etc), I do check up on their profiles. Imagine my surprise when I found out that a particular player who is at level 30+ is just 2 weeks old into the game.
I must say that while the deathmatch mode is a great mode to play and level up, the level requirement in order to play the mode should be increased from the current requirement of 15 to a level where players at the least know the basic strategies, moves and plays of the game. Plus, I find the deathmatch mode biased towards the players with the over-powered cards and the low level players do not even stand a minute chance against them.
I know it sounds discriminating against the low level players but it will be for their own good (won't it?). Again, my sincere apologies for any misconceptions & misunderstandings on the topic.
I'd like to know if the community shares the same thoughts as me.
ty and GG ... always
Before DM it was PreFulls, before that it wasn't really required to level up fast as the Leader cards were available in packs.
But I'm only saying if it isn't DM, it will be something completely else people use to level up fast. there's no real way to avoid level 45+ with no idea on how to play this game. Heck before DM's I once saw a level 70+ that had hardly any notion of what he was doing.
Why? I mean, you know what you're getting into when you enter the room: you're going up against all the cards they can't play in ELO. In T2, you're going up against decks filled to the brim with all the 4* and 5* they can find. And even when you lose, you get at least 20 BPs. You could mindlessly 1-pill all your fights while watching movies on the side, and still level up faster than the best ELO players.
I play T1 DM primarily, and I've stomped people 50 levels over me. Sometimes they just got crap draws, sometimes that doesn't work as an excuse. I've also been brought to school by level 12 guys (you sure about that level 15 requirement?). That's the name of the game.
So what if there are high-level, low skill players? It's not like level has ever been a measure of talent; it's only one of time spent playing the game. Your 'fix' doesn't look like it would change anything. If you really want level to reflect skill, you need much more in-depth changes than this.
All your points are valid but what I meant to say is won't the DMs be more fun if your opponents at least know what or how to play at the most basic level.
Yes, there might be several high level players who lack skills but even the basic skills (like courage, confidence etc for example)? come on! Don't you think that's taking it a bit far? I expect my opponents to at least know the basics of the game.
If more specific requirements are implemented such as a minimum ELO record of 1100, no. of fights won, or higher level requirement, the mode would not only be a "quickie" but also refine a players skill which would improve the overall scene of UR, won't it?
@HanJiWoo: Who said players who 0HKO aren't good players? DMs are supposed to be played similar to DTs ... fast. Win fast, lose faster.
@0UC-DarkEagle: It's all human nature I guess, but that doesn't mean we can't do something about it. Ty for pointing that out
@ HouseOfLeaves: Yes, a higher level doesn't necessarily depict a players skill level. About my "fix" ... umm ... I just mentioned just as an example and wanted the community to express their views on the topic. I'm sure about the level requirement.
@ Trippie: All that and also who help out the community ... that's the sign of a good player in my books.