I have an idea that explains why the community consider hunters OP


Most best monsters are likely in the gold level and most best hunters are likely in the silver level.
I have the idea because once I met the PC 1st Griffin in Hunt 2.0, and he ranked silver master.
Then I began to think why the best player didn’t rank the best.

It’s reasonable that matches with pubs largely bring down the hunters’ score.
When Hunt 2.0 just came out, I ranked silver elite with my friends.
After some games with pubs, my score dropped to silver expert.

So don’t complain about balance anymore, you might just at a lower level than your opponents.


There’s no link between the rank system and the fact that Hunters can shut down all Monster’s options in high level.


I’m trying to find some kind of logic or sense in your words but… can’t


Well, I just mean that some aren’t in the high level as they think they are.


Most hunters are currently ranked higher than most monsters. You’ll find that the top ranks for hunter consist of a few gold destroyer, where I believe gold elite or gold expert is the highest rank for monsters. This is in stark contrast to your statement


Even for Hunters, Gold destroyer-elite is reserved for those who won all their placement matches and never played again.

Current rank system is a very bad joke.


Merely because of those placement matches and a lack of a bigger community. Naturally those ranks were most likely given out ages ago and haven’t changed anything since. I believe a rank reset would fix this, and would help to more accurately depict the current standings.


Hunters are too strong. It’s not a speculation or an opinion but a fact backed with q lot of numbers and factors that show. Hunters are OP and Monsters are UP. You don’t notice these things until higher levels and literally the entire logic of the original post makes negative sense.


I get what you’re saying. The truth is that it does take less time to rank up as monster. However, the meta for hunters is really good. Unless you are a kraken plaster, the odds aren’t really in your favor.


Theres no correlation between rank and “skill”.

Many, MANY “high end” competitive-level players, play with their friends, and not just their 1337 hardcore team try hard mode wheee go buddies- Because they, like a lot of people, would rather just play the game, especially when its convenient for them.

Which means quite often theyll play with people of lower skill than themselves, or their normal team mates.

Which means their rank gets brought down.

Balance is contextual in this game. Its not AS hunter favored as a lot of the “1337 monstar mainz” here complain that it is, IMO. And i Strongly feel the problem is exacerbated by the fact that the MAJORITY of players think they are better than they really are. “Im better than these guys damn it. I shouldnt be losing. Obviously its the games fault” kind of deal-

HOWEVER, with some specific “meta comps”, it is generally hunter-favored. Key word being “Generally”. I strongly argue that kraken is not only strong enough to deal with basically all of the “meta” comps in this game- But he quite arguably has the advantage (albeit slightly- If the kraken player misses combos and opportunities, he will lose). Behemoth is also a notable example here, i feel hes disadvantaged (albeit, like kraken, “only slightly”) against even the “weakest” comps.

But the vast majority of the OTHER possible comps against the majority of the monsters? Id argue its pretty darn close to balanced. While admittedly not perfect, ANY monster can turn hunter-mistakes into monster-wins at just about any point. Even behemoth. That is something worth considering.

If I were to sum it up, itd be like this:

… Meta comps

Remaining monsters… Most hunter comps

Behemoth…Weakest comps

Stronger things on the top of the list, weakest things on the bottom of the list. Things on the same level, being around the same power. If I could change a few things I would- but am limited by spacing. Id only rate kraken “half a line” above the “meta” comps for example- As While i feel hes arguably stronger than them, i dont feel hes OBSCENELY stronger than them. Etc


I’m in silver 3=4 stars back in the day and I would run into gold griffins


No matter what you say, you probably never will convince me.


You’re actually so off the mark it’s not even funny.

Hunters are strong because they’re a team of strong individuals. A team will always be more effective than an individual by itself. Especially when that team has massive damage potential and the Monsters are sad and exploitable.

Also, I notice you think rank = skill. As basically everyone else has said, they’re NOT directly correlated.


My group of friends alternate between playing monster in custom games. Even though some of us are monster mains if often feels like playing monster is a sacrifice so that the hunters might enjoy a nice casual game.

For reference we’re all high level veteran players (1000 hours plus) and play on PC. Pubs are different of course, but if people play the game long enough they will all be high level. Unfortunately high level play isn’t what the game is balanced around so after a certain skill threshold is reached those players tend to quit or play less often.