Re: How to cope with being a bad player?
Posted: 17 January 2026, 01:35
I would say this is true in the sense that only the top 1% of players reach the top 1% in achievement (Elo or arena).MarkSteere wrote: ↑17 January 2026, 00:44Well sure. Theoretically, anyone at any level could seek to improve their play. But realistically? I have forum channels for many of my games. Sometimes a topic will spring up about hearistics in a certain game. Only the upper echelon guys are ever interested in analyzing games. In my case, I'm not at that level. I can't participate in those discussions. I don't even understand what they're talking about.
I suspect most players just want to get on with it. There's little interest in earning a PhD in game science.
But for those top 1% (I have a few games for which I qualify
), the rise to the top 1% is its own reward, even if it holds little real world value. But for me, there is additional value. It keeps my brain sharp, and I hope it will help stave off dementia when I am older. It helps sharpen my problem-solving skills. And I enjoy mathematical analysis and spreadsheets anyway, so for me, that's an added benefit rather than a cost.
This will vary by individual. As noted in this thread (I think by MeepleLowda?), for some players, at some point the analysis and study will begin to seem like work, and at that point, it will no longer be fun.
I reached this wall with Terraforming Mars. For whatever reason, I am stuck around 500-ish Elo (I have been as high as 535) despite having played it a LOT. I have accepted this, and so I no longer study the game much, I just play and have fun and accept that I cannot beat 500+ players consistently enough to advance toward 600 or 700 Elo.
In other games, my study and analysis still have me ascending and still enjoying the game and the study and analysis.
So, it varies by game and by player.
But, as has been noted, for people who truly wish to improve and are willing to put in the effort, the tools and information are publicly available.