Talk:Viability Ranking/@comment-36515094-20191116015031/@comment-39644519-20191116114554

I mean, I’m not saying that having these types of players there is bad, but I do think a lot of people are overrating their opinions just because they “top players”. One thing about that is that if they are top players, they probably only use a small number of the best monsters (mostly), meaning they probably don’t have the experience we do with the lower tiers. Also, even if they are top players, some of their opinions make absolutely no sense, and I think a lot of the Council could get behind me saying some of these things are wrong. At the very least, I disagree with a lot of these. For example, this Yami guy said (among other things): that Hobkin is utter garbage other than duels, that Wildbird’s skills were severely lacking (they really aren’t), SEVERLY overrated Nikasia (he said she was better than Fusion, Mirak, Dunn Ra, and Draghar, to name a few. She’s fine, but nowhere near that good), said Nadiel was better than Draghar, said Nadiel is the best nature monster and Charmless is better than O’Reilly, said that Zeighar is extremely good and better than Xiron, said Babari is better than Neobuki, Faraday, and Volthar, said that Necomancer was better than Pierceid and Helgudin, and more.

I think the top players will probably have some good opinion for the top few tiers, but after that, I don’t think we can rely on them. They won’t have experience with that kind of stuff. And even if they do give their opinions on the ranks, just becuase they are a top player doens’t mean they’re always right. Look through the list of stuff Yami said and I challenge you to just find one of things that you disagree with. I can almost guarantee that you all will disagree with at least one of those choices, all made by a “top player”.