Above which elo is considered a high level player?

[JubileuAOE]

I would like to hear the community's opinion on this, which elo do you consider to be a high level player.

Ex: 1800 or 2k. only above 2400. etc...

 

[HongeyKong]

2k = bare minimum

 

[AttilaTheHun]

Pretty much depends on your definition. Everything above 1k is already above average. But probably no one will suggest 1.1k is already high level. I would say top 5% of all players is high level. This sets the bar at around 1600. But given the nature of this forum, 1600 is still called a big noob.

 

[Andre_2i]

2500

 

[Rayne]

Whatever is ‘1 level’ below the top is high to me. Back when I was active, that would be 2300. But since there’s 2600-2700 players, I lean more towards Andre’s answer of 2500. Sounds about right. 2k to me in any game is just the start of getting good. I wouldn’t consider it high imo.

 

[Ovenka]

I would say, it also depends on tournament results, for example I wouldnt call hoang high level player despite his rating

 

[Zbyszek]

This is my take. How would you call my skill level?

	world class	High level	good	my skill level	basic knowledge	noobs
portion	0,07%​	0,27%​	1,10%​	4,49%​	18,43%​	75,56%​
total number	30​	123​	504​	2068​	8477​	34757​
lowest rank	30​	153​	657​	2725​	11202​	45959​
elo cutoff	2488​	2168​	1859​	1551​	1199​	0​
elo cutoff ≈	2400​	2100​	1800​	1500​	1200​	0​

 

[JubileuAOE]

This is my take. How would you call my skill level?

	world class	High level	good	my skill level	basic knowledge	noobs
portion	0,07%​	0,27%​	1,10%​	4,49%​	18,43%​	75,56%​
total number	30​	123​	504​	2068​	8477​	34757​
lowest rank	30​	153​	657​	2725​	11202​	45959​
elo cutoff	2488​	2168​	1859​	1551​	1199​	0​
elo cutoff ≈	2400​	2100​	1800​	1500​	1200​	0​

How did you get this information?

 

[Zbyszek]

I messed around in excel 11

The facts are:
-elo cutoffs at that exact rank from aoe2.net
-total number of players 46000

My decisions were:
-world class is 30 players
-6 skill levels
-number of players increases exponetially the lower you go. (base 4,1 so it adds up to 100%)

 

[Hunyadi_]

Good players start to form around 1800/1900 but don't become consistently good until they're 2k+

 

[_Donatello_]

I would say 2k is already a high lvl, strong from 1800 imo
really good 2.2k+
Expert 2.4k
Pro 2600
Super pro 2750

 

[kalpit00]

My highest peak was 1800 when I was really grinding hard. And I couldn't even touch a 1900 if they played the ladder game as seriously. Of course, elo is just a number, but being called high level is definitely atleast 2k+ back in the old days. And currently, I would say even above 2200.

2700+ Super Pros, who only drop games vs pros occasionally (maybe 1/4 games vs pros)
2500+ Pro, usually will always win a player below 2300 9/10 times
2300+ Expert (or whatever label you want to call it) : Can compete vs anyone, might have 50/50 winrate in their own range, 80/20 vs above 2100s.
2200 : Fair middle ground to consider high level
2100 : really trying hard to get to that high level status
2000 : the benchmark to even consider oneself as a high level player 11
1900 : Beats every 1700 and below like a chump, drops games vs 1800s+, can compete vs 2000

1800 : Considers themselves a good player and is actually a fairly decent player, can hold their own in a RF lobby
1700 : Try hard 1600 who lames every game
1600 : Considers themselves a good player but only beats a 1500 due to having played 500+ more games, more experience (older players, I come across so many known names at this elo and all are like me thinking we are good players 11).
1500 : New DE wannabes reaching this feat after learning kts or xbows due to franks or britons and adapting to other civs and transitions thereby winning 1400s. Has prior RTS experience or has good macro micro cycles
1400 : Beats 1300 and below with the same franks britons picking but being better
1300 and below : All noobs

I am gonna try to make a bottom-up elo list as well and try to make it as descriptive as possible

 

[JubileuAOE]

Eu brinquei no excel 11

Os fatos são:
-elo cortes nessa classificação exata de aoe2.net
-número total de jogadores 46000

Minhas decisões foram:
-classe mundial é de 30 jogadores
-6 níveis de habilidade
-número de jogadores aumenta exponencialmente quanto mais baixo você for. (base 4,1 então soma 100%)

Very good, like

 

[JubileuAOE]

My highest peak was 1800 when I was really grinding hard. And I couldn't even touch a 1900 if they played the ladder game as seriously. Of course, elo is just a number, but being called high level is definitely atleast 2k+ back in the old days. And currently, I would say even above 2200.

2700+ Super Pros, who only drop games vs pros occasionally (maybe 1/4 games vs pros)
2500+ Pro, usually will always win a player below 2300 9/10 times
2300+ Expert (or whatever label you want to call it) : Can compete vs anyone, might have 50/50 winrate in their own range, 80/20 vs above 2100s.
2200 : Fair middle ground to consider high level
2100 : really trying hard to get to that high level status
2000 : the benchmark to even consider oneself as a high level player 11
1900 : Beats every 1700 and below like a chump, drops games vs 1800s+, can compete vs 2000

1800 : Considers themselves a good player and is actually a fairly decent player, can hold their own in a RF lobby
1700 : Try hard 1600 who lames every game
1600 : Considers themselves a good player but only beats a 1500 due to having played 500+ more games, more experience (older players, I come across so many known names at this elo and all are like me thinking we are good players 11).
1500 : New DE wannabes reaching this feat after learning kts or xbows due to franks or britons and adapting to other civs and transitions thereby winning 1400s. Has prior RTS experience or has good macro micro cycles
1400 : Beats 1300 and below with the same franks britons picking but being better
1300 and below : All noobs

I am gonna try to make a bottom-up elo list as well and try to make it as descriptive as possible

great comment, very detailed and I really liked your opinion.

 

[Crawsack]

These questions are always odd to me honestly. The whole point of elo is to put a number on someone's skill in relation to others, deciding whether that elo is "high level" takes an objective measurement and makes it completely subjective.

The objective facts are, based on elo distributions that people have done for 1v1 elo:

1600 is top 5% of playerbase
1700 is top 3%
1800 is top 2%
1900 is top 1.2%
2k is top .8%
2.1k is top .5%
2.2k is top .3%
2.3k is top .2%

The comments above how a player 100 elo above another can consistently dominate- yes obviously, they're 100 elo apart, that's the whole point of elo. 100 points of elo difference means the higher player will win 64% of the time, 200 elo difference means the top player will win 74% of the time.

I.S. 318 Chess Team

www.318chess.com

Here's a table that breaks that down, it's not a subjective discussion that will yield anything more accurate.

If I had to throw my "subjective" hat in the ring, I'd say anything over 2k elo, which puts you in the top less than 1% makes you a "high level" player. In chess you're considered an Expert or Candidate Master over 2k elo and I think that definition would apply to AoE2.

 

[SaladEsc]

Above my elo = cheaters and lamer tryhards
Under my elo = total noobs

 

[dave_hun]

Above my elo = macro users