Let's have a look at TOP-15 ranked Hunters and Monsters... interesting


This is how it looks. An example for EU region. PC platform. (below)

A few facts:

  • top hunter rank is 3800 / top monster rank is 2400 (!)
  • all top hunters are Gold Destroyer division, there are no Destroyer monsters at all, only four above Expert, but most of them at Gold Expert level or lower
  • Gold Expert is three divisions below Gold Destroyer, three divisions gap represents huge difference in rank
  • majority of top level monster players use Kraken (I believe I can say that, right?)

These are the facts. Now let’s put the following questions:
1) based on this data would you say meta is monster favored or hunter favored ? much or a little ?
2) looking at the best players in this ranking - would you say top Krakens are OP or UP vs. top hunters ?

thoughts ?


You don’t need to look at the charts to know the game is currently hunter favored because of a few broken pieces in the game. However there is no saying whether these people got their rank through Kraken play, or any other monster; same can be said for the hunters I suppose, though I find it hard to believe since it’s harder to maintain a good rank with a poor team as a hunter player.


The biggest point to take from this is that less than half the Hunters have more than 10 games under their belt, where Monsters only 3 have 10 games played. Out of the top 15 Hunters, only 4 of them have 10 or more wins. For monsters only monsters have 10 wins or less. This only shows that it is easier to go through Determining Rank as a team and score high and then leave and is more likely to be done by Hunters than Monsters.


Those Single-Digit wins for those Gold Hunters doe…

I think it’s safe to say that the Leaderboards are a bit uh… skewed… and not accurate representations of skill.


Pc- Apparently hunter favored even though I had no problems playing monster.
Console- Balanced/monster


Yeah what others have said this data is so small most of these players have hardly played any games, so that makes it hard to make any conclusion of the games balance from this data.


I fully share this opinion, but we have discussions appearing “if”. So this comparison of actual data is quite interesting for me


Correct. But I can see no reason why this trend would not reconfirm on a larger sample, if it works for 10…20 matches and 30 people. And those few hunters who played 30…40 matches apparently kept their high rank, so it does not suggest that in case of lower samples they are completely unreliable.


I can flip a coin 8 times and get tails 6 of those 8 times. Does that make it a reliable trend or accurate way to predict results?


If the rank difference top hunter vs. top monster was insignificant, then I would agree. For precise assessment you need high-volume statistical sample. But here you can see data form10…20 matches at least and the rank difference is like 1200+ !

Also, as I said above, these people who played significantly more matches - are still within the same rank brackets like that smaller samples (with 10-20 matches).


But those few who flipped the coin 40 times apparently got the same results. Now try to get 30 tails in this case.


Technically it should be reliable enough to point out your coin is either broken, or you’re cheating. Regardless, the pool should be big enough for a game the size of Evolve; and by that I mean it’s saddeningly low player population of around 200 to 300 people.

@trapjaw_breeder ; are these charts based on weekly, monthly or overall numbers? Because that could be the reason behind such a small number of matches.


Hmm I believe overall. I just made snapshot without changing anything.


Please stop coming out with this rubbish. You’re no better than the majority of those in the top of the rankings who played a few games and were placed highly. I can as good as guarantee you would get destroyed if you played the actual strong teams. For one because you play behemoth who on pc, as you know, dies stupidly quick.

Are you actually taking these rankings in anyway serious?
Putting the “data” aside, yes the game is hunter favoured.


To assess what precisely is the top rank based on 10 matches? Surely not.

But to see that top players are able to jump up to 3800 rank when playing hunters and 2400 when monster, and this pattern is appearing not on one person but in a group of 15-30 people - then this is interesting.


What should have been done with Ranked is that the assessment of your skill over the course of 10 matches should have, at most, placed a Hunter or Monster at Bronze/Silver or Gold Skilled from where he would be able to work his way up to higher tiers (meaning Elite, Master, Destroyer).

I mean, I won last week 10 matches in a row (I got lucky) and got granted points varying from +1 to at most +8. However, if I had to create a new account and play those exact same matches, I would be in the Gold Tier right now. Is it then considered a fair judgement of skill, not really.


I hate if you do this! -The game is hunter favored on pc but not on console. PC is not the only one plattform in the world!


Actually how does it look on consoles? Could someone post the snapshot?


It’s funny, but I play Monster on PC with an Xbox 360 controller and Hunter using mouse and keyboard. Although I do believe aiming can be a bit tricky using a controller, especially Goliath with his Rock Throw (I have gotten a lot better though), the fact is that a controller is much better to faster combo or switch your weaponry then on a keyboard (personal opinion, don’t throw rocks now)


It still really doesn’t say much to me. Seems more of a ranking and points problem to me rather than balance from this data. I mean all of the monsters in the top have really good WLR and that to me says more than the rank they hold. It looks like the average WLR is way better for the top monsters than the top hunters. So I am still not sure this says anything about the balance of the game. (keeping in mind from other than the Kraken I think monsters need a little love on consoles and even more love on PC)

@flamand_quebec13 I don’t blame you on the xbox controller for monster. I don’t play a lot of PC but when I play games in third person I like a game pad, and a mouse for first person games.