u/Ike-Gwain

This one is a bit different when it comes to rating I mainly rate them based on how good they fare in the current meta, how well their classes compliment each other, superpowers, weaknesses and strengths and how many top tier decks and strategies they have currently.

Current Gravitree vs current Fig vs current Espresso vs current Sun Shroom vs Current Waxer vs 1/4 Con Man vs 4 cost Briar Rose vs 2 cost give 3 brains Nebula vs 2 cost Mustache Monument vs 3 cost Stompadon vs 3 cost Valk

Current Waxer VS Current Sun Shroom VS Current Espresso VS Old Clique Pea VS 1/4 Con Man

DD has been fun to learn especially since I almost never play melee characters, I've gotten him to captain getting better with combos, 1v1s, positioning etc. Something I've noticed that is my damage is usually lower than my damage blocked and I have to ask is this normal? Doesn't matter if I play good or bad but I always notice my damage blocked is quite high like I definitely played way too passively before and just went full dive but now I've started to learn how to mix and match in between and not to always stand by waiting for the opportunity to dive but still my damage blocked is very high with usually my damage being lower so I'm here to ask from more experienced players is this normal?

Has anybody faced this new phenomenon where someone on your team does really well first round then decides to switch to a character they obviously don't know how to play with than proceed to die die die and lose very winnable games?

This is happened to me FRICKING 3 TIMES in Comp like in the last 2 days

First incident:

This harry guy does really well on rogue and we manage to win on defense without our opponents touching once than proceeds to switch and alternate between psy, magik and wanda and do jackshit with all 3 which led us to lose A GAME WHERE THEY DIDN'T EVEN GET A TOUCH ON POINT (33% percent but you get the point)

Second incident:

This supposed Count Invis proceeds to insist on FF despite us doing really well first round and the opponents having someone who ended the game 14/14. This bitch proceeds to then afk at the start of the second round, horrible plays on top of horrible plays like ulting solo on point when 4 of us were down and you wanna know her stats endgame? More damage than healing and only a measly 12k compared to our enemy invis who got 25K with way less damage meaning SHE ACTUALLY WAS HEALING AND TAKING CARE OF HER TEAM INSTEAD OF GIVING UP HALF WAY ON SUCH A WINNABLE GAME MIND NOT ONCE DID THE OPPOSITION PLAY A DIVE.

Third incident:

Domination we win first round quite handedly running 3 dps but it worked due to enemies having Thor and Groot as tanks against Star (me) Bucky and Wanda (with strange team up) can you guess what our wanda decided to do? SWITCH to Black Cat WHO OBVIOUSLY SHE HAS 0 EXPERIENCE WITH Then IRON MAN mind you while She did this the enemy's dps switched to goddamn NAMOR and she sees this then proceeded like I said earlier to play IRON MAN OF ALL THINGS THE TANKS DIDN'T EVEN FRICKING SWITCH. Than the audacity to switch back to Wanda on 3rd round (clearly showing She knew what she was doing) and we proceed to lose slightly on overtime like WHYYYYYYYYYYYYY?

ALL OF THIS SO THAT WHEN THEY GET REPORTED FOR THROWING WHICH THEY OBVIOUSLY DID THEY GET A FREE PASS CAUSE OH THEY HAD A BAD GAME.

Or maybe it's my fault for complementing my team in between rounds yeah that might be it.

Not a single spot here is ordered here in any way so no i don't think Hearty treat is better than rolling stone which is better than black hole and than Sumo etc

F: useless cards or cards that did something a 1000 games ago.

E: very very very niche use cards that's niche ain't even good.

D: E but better

C: decent cards usually outclassed

B: mainly family engine type of cards or cards that need to be built around to be great

A: almost auto include cards

S: you get the idea

Before I get into another stupid argument where someone tries to completely disregard outclassed as a metric for ranking and judgment on a tier list and consider it irrelevant (yes that did happen) not every placement follows strictly the criteria for the tier I gave them some tiers have some leniency and flexibility to it for example :

All Star doesn't fit the criteria of B but he's too good to be considered C but not strong enough to be considered A so he goes B.

Again any and all unnecessary side comments or insults directed at me or my tier list I'm not gonna respond. You got a critique good otherwise shut the fuck up.

Rankings come from a bit of everything (Ult league performance, lawn Warz, slight consideration for budget value and rarity and high tier competitive gameplay)

Icons are outdated

F: useless cards or cards that did something 100 games ago

E: very very very niche cards that don't deserve thier niche to get invested in

D: Sale as E but better

C: decent cards usually outclassed

B: mainly family engine type of cards and similar cards you built around to be good and are good in thier own specific decks

A: awesome cards almost auto include

S: you get the idea

No single card is ordered in any tier so no I don't think area 22 is better than Cheese Cutter or anything like that and my rankings are based on pretty every metric you think of (Ult league performance, Lawn warz and high tier competitive gameplay)

And before I get into another stupid argument where someone genuinely disregards outclassing as a metric in a tier list and considers completely irrelevant (Yes that did happen) some placments obviously have some flexibility and leniency to them as not every ranking follows strictly the tier criteria.

Example: Fraidy is too good to be C but not good enough to be A so that's why it's B evn though it doesn't match the criteria of that tier.

Again has to be said any and all unnecessary side comments or insults to me or my tier list I'm gonna just ignore you and not respond. If you have a critique or disagreement good otherwise shut the fuck up.

F: Useless cards or cards that did something once a 100 games ago

E: Very Very Very niche cards that's niche isn't really even worth it

D: same as E but better

C: decent cards not great usually outclassed

B: Good cards mostly family engine type of cards

A: Great cards usable in almost any decks

S: you get the idea

No not a single is ordered in any way shape or form so no I don't think Con Mon is worse than Bungee nor he's better than Quazard.

Another thing before I get into another stupid argument where someone genuinely wants to disregard Outclassed as something irrelevant when ranking in a tier list (yes that did happen) not every placement follows strictly the criteria I set in each tier there's obvious flexibility and leniency to some placements cause obviously not every card can be judged the same.

Again don't feel like this is necessary but any and all unnecessary side comments or insults directed at me or my tier list I'm simply not gonna reply. You've got a disagreement or a critique good, otherwise shut the fuck up.