The bants dried up. I know I cracked down really hard on people proposing changes, but I don't want to come off like I am not listening. I have made a few changes below the 90s that people have brought up that I thought were fair, its just there have been some notable changes that people haven't agreed with yet haven't brought up any points to me that I thought were good enough to get me to change my perspective. So to stir up some more healthy bant I will go over the process and what I did to Grimsight's old list to justify myself or let people rage at my reasoning.
So it started off with me dragging Maple and Godfreid into a TS. I asked Godfreid to make me a current melee list, cause I wouldn't have any idea what I was doing with one, and I told Maple to help me out with the under 90s while I just worked around with the forum shit (seriously, having to edit Grimsight's list and changing the pictures and tables and shit is a bigger pain than it looks). While they did that, I would just propose changes to the above 90s and they would thumbs up or down it and we would talk about it.
I went down Grimsight's list in the 90s, proposed each and every change in front of Maple and Godfreid, and we had a discussion on each. Originally I wanted to move down Zzeth, Breaches, Zorkoth, and Ghost, as they were way too overinflated on the old list:
- Zzeth's biggest achievements were basically being Jackie's teammate. I remain of the opinion his 2v2 team could have worked just like it did with anyone above 80 in his place. Not to say hes not a good player in his own right (hes like what, 87 now?), but lets just say his trophy rack is inflated by 2v2 tournaments that he himself would host. A good groupfighter, but not much else. Not 90s quality.
- Breaches was similar. A good groupfighter but he never absolutely carried groupfights. He was great with teamwork though and had great awareness though, so he stays on the list, just not in the 90s.
- Zorkoth was way overrated. His biggest strength was being unpredictable as hell, with him weaving in a stun chamber when youd least expect it, along with some good groupfighting. Also not 90s. Think RitZ had too much hand in that, along with many of the over 90s in the old list.
- Ghost was a great player, and he didn't fall far, but he never really stood out a whole lot, in part due to being in the 12th.
A few people got moved around in the 90s but not moved out:
- I nerfed Jackie and Tammo a point, because I see a 100 player as absolutely unbeatable at their peak/year of player, and I felt 97 and 96 were awfully close. 96 and 95 are still pretty close, but it feels just a tad bit more accurate to me.
- I felt like Asian has always been good throughout the entirety of NW. He was good when I started playing the game, hes added stuff to his arsenal as the games gone on, and hes far from washed up now. I think that deserved a reward of a couple points so I gave him the 94. If he fixed his shit when it came to tournaments, I might have even gave him the 95.
- I felt Ritz was a couple points too high. The whole old above 90s list was made with RitZ having the biggest say in the matter, and RitZ was doing really well at the time. I think in hindsight he had a very heavy reliance on turkish kicks, which was something alot of the better players in the community didn't really have to deal with a whole lot, and also doesn't take a whole lot of skill or practice. Thats not to say I don't think hes a great player, and I would say a 92 reflects him pretty well.
- Lithios was good, but I think a 93 reflects him better. Thats basically it.
- Pointblank was a great player, but I think a 94 was too high. Its hard to really justify the super high spot he had on the list when most players nowadays only know him BECAUSE of the list, or through other players explaining who he was, or through that one 2v2 video. I don't think this one is too much up for debate because I will put my foot down that nobody knows better at how good PB is better than I do, not even PB himself. I would only really accept an equally credible source to really debate him up or down.
- Coconut got moved down a point to sit at 90. I think this is a better reflection, because Coconut has always been a great player, but I think he was a very quiet player who didn't really go to many tournaments or do a whole lot of FT7s (to my knowledge).
- I decided Maples dominance at his peak was good enough to put him as a 93, a couple points up from his old 91. I know this one is a controversial one with Maple listed as an author, but believe me, it wasn't him that suggested it. Having seen Maples peak, I know how good he is, and this is an all time list, not a "If you didn't play before 2015, get out" list. While before 2015 was the most competition in the games history, and the best players were far from washed up, playing upwards of 1000 hours a year, I would say it would be wrong to not recognize a truly good player, who I think could have competed back then. So I proposed it, and no real objections were brought up, so it stayed. If you think its wrong, debate me, but I just hope those who are trying to imply he bumped himself are just memeing, cause he didn't.
So with the aforementioned people out of the 90s, and the remaining ones readjusted, it seemed a little bit too small so I started spitballing names for people to take some spots.
- Havoc was a pretty easy choice to make as I felt like he was pretty underrated on the last list, even at 88. So he was the first to get bumped into the 90s. I am currently deciding if 91 is too low for him, but I will have to think on that some more.
- Godfreid was moved up because he has turned into quite the formidable duelist and, as I said, while there is a meme that he can't groupfight, I would say that's not true. While there is a case for saying that Godfreid isn't as good at groupfighting as he is at dueling, to say he isn't a good group fighter, I would say, isn't true. I would say he has done enough to deserve a spot in the 90s, and thus I proposed it (again, not Godfreid himself). His original spot was at 91, but Maple said he could maybe go a point higher, and I decided "Sure, why not?". So that is where he is now. Godfreid at no point said anything during that discussion.
On to the honorable mentions, because there were a couples names tossed around to rise into the 90s, but at the end didn't make the cut.
- Jokes aside, Bill's name was considered being at a 90. But the thing was, it was hard to say what exactly made Bill deserving. He has won a tourny here and there, but I don't think he was ever dominant enough to hold a spot, nor is there anything about his game that is truly noteworthy. His blocking is very good, and he plays very carefully. That's about it. It's enough to make a good player, but is it good enough to justify a 90? Me and Maple think not. There was actually some debate on this one, though, as Godfreid disagreed with the final decision. There wasn't really a way to compromise on the matter, and 2 out of 3 votes said "Nay", so he went no higher than 89.
- The next to be considered was Russian. He has been a solid player for a very long time. I vaguely remember a very talented RussianFury back in the 38e, long before the 71st. Its just it was hard to justify a spot for him in the 90s without the dueling success. I know I have argued long and hard on this thread about "Dueling vs. Groupfighting in determining placement on the list", but his spot at 89 is almost solely thanks to his groupfighting success. I would say that is valuing groupfighting, though for some reason, others would disagree. I will be straightforward and honest that yes, I do value dueling more, but even if I did value them equally, it would just be hard to put someone in the 90s without success in the part of the game with the most reliance on the individual. So while he did get an upgrade from his spot on Grimsight's list, he fell shy of 90.
Besides that, the under 90 list is I would say an eternal WIP, so I won't really go over the changes I made. Its harder to be accurate the lower you go, because there are way more players along with the players themselves being less consistent or well known. I am listening though, so if there is a fair change proposed, odds are I will actually implement it.
Current list is solely made by Godfreid and nobody else, Maple and I had no hand in it, and I don't see a whole lot of people having issue with it so I won't really touch on that.
Why put up the leaders list if no effort was put into that part
Effort was put into it, just not by me. It was made by Grimsight, not me, as I have said. The only change I did was move Grimsight down a couple points. I was around to help teach a 3eVolt_SoD_Grimsight how to block, and I was in his regiment when he was in charge, and I don't think he has had near the impact on the game he thinks he has. I think the tier I put him in reflects him better.
But by effort, I assume you mean "Why include it if you aren't gonna change it?". Well, I will be honest, the reason why is ever so intertwined with why I got rid of the current regiment's list and why no regiments have been added to the all time list; there haven't really been any new 'great' leaders in the community. Bandwagoning is basically an art form in NA, and the most dominant regiments this past year or two (from what I have heard) can basically just be boiled down to concentrated stacks of skilled players, with some of the most dominant ones basically already being on the list, such as the newer incarnations of the 71st and 3e. I mean, if you disagree and feel like someone deserves a shout, go for it, but odds are the way the list is now is probably the way it will stay, not because im unwilling to listen, its just I don't think we are ever gonna have another Karth or AsianP or Breaches. So for now, I am gonna include that list to honor the greatest leaders the game will probably ever have. [/list]
