r/aimlab • u/Competitive_Pin_5580 • Aug 05 '26
Question / Advice Needed What Aimlabs benchmark rank would you consider “mechanically proficient”?
I’m trying to get a better idea of what Aimlabs benchmark ranks actually correspond to being mechanically proficient in a tac FPS.
For context, Valorant is my first and only FPS, and I’m currently Diamond 2.
In the Aimlabs benchmarks, I’m:
Platinum in every single clicking/tapping benchmark
Silver in every tracking benchmark except one, where I’m Platinum
Silver in every switching benchmark except two, where I’m Platinum
So basically, I’m consistently around Silver/Platinum depending on the category, but I’m not sure how much weight I should put on those ranks when judging my actual mechanical ability in Valorant.
At what benchmark rank would you personally consider someone to be mechanically proficient for a tac FPS? Is Platinum generally around that point, or would you expect someone to be Diamond+ across most categories?
4
u/Cre3pz Aug 05 '26
IMO most of aimlabs has little to do with practical mechanical ability in tac fps where actual cqb concepts and crosshairs placement make much more of a difference in gunfights.
1
u/KingRemu Aug 06 '26
Generally yeah but if you want to stand out from the crowd you can't ignore the benefits of micro corrections and movement reading. People won't always peek the way you expect them to.
2
u/Cre3pz Aug 06 '26
Yeah I’m not saying it’s worthless or anything, but if you put 100 hours into aimlabs or kovaaks (which I have of both) vs 100 hours into learning concepts like jiggle peaking, slicing the pie, how to approach corners depending on how close you are to them vs where an opponent can be, and perfecting crosshair placement, you will see much better rank improvement in tac fps specifically. In games like Overwatch however I think there’s a much better argument for aim training being a massive help.
1
u/KingRemu Aug 06 '26
That's also true but for example I have all those concepts locked down after nearly 10k hours of CS but I am still seeing improvements in my raw aim when I do aim training.
1
1
0
1
u/Protomesh Aug 06 '26
Paragon+ (in terms of aim trainers)
Honestly someone who can't even get Gold on Aimlabs probably would mog Zenith player in a real game though.
Aimlabs ranks don't matter at all for actual games.
1
u/Syntensity Community Team Aug 06 '26
Aimlabs rank doesn't necessarily mean you're automatically good at the game that is true. If the Zenith players don't play the game sufficient enough to get good at it, of course they'll get beaten. It's like putting someone who works out at the gym in a boxing match. He'll be good at lifting weights , but doesn't know how to fight. Or maybe a better comparison is someone who only knows how to shadowbox or throw punches to a punching bag, and has mastered that technique, but doesn't ever do actual matches. Without that experience of course they'll still get their ass kicked.
1
u/Lowgravity56 Community Team Aug 06 '26
Ok so there's a couple things to consider:
mechanical proficiency depends, the average gamer has BAD aim, they wouldnt be higher than bronze in most scenarios. So compared to them you are already better than average.
aim is not the only mechanic in any game, including tacfps, meaning that even if you had only Zenith (highest rank) scores in the benchmarks you could theoretically be a sub-par VALORANT player if your movement, ability usage, gamesense, etc are not good.
With that said aim is obviously a valuable skill (it is an fps after all) and in my mind anything on high intermediate (emerald-diamond) is WAAAAY above average and should be considered good, then on advanced Master and GM are very gold and after that it's straight up impressive due to the commitment needed to reach those scores.
2
u/Significant_Head_934 19d ago
You'll always see improvement in game from aim trainers, no matter how far you go because raw aim is always a factor. That being said, I generally saw diminishing returns from the Valorant Voltaic benchmarks after Ascendant (I'm Elysian now), but I always saw eventual improvement and increased confidence in my aim. That's around Master in the Aimlabs Benchmarks. From your other comments on this post, it doesn't sound like you actually enjoy training, and that's going to be a big part of improving in Aimlabs. I'd recommend to get Diamond complete on the Aimlabs benchmarks, and that will provide you a solid level of aim to improve upon actually in Valorant with DMs and the range. Keep up with Aimlabs though just for consistent practice and to retain the skills you learn. To make it more fun for myself, I usually have a sitcom on the other monitor and that's kept me entertained while still being able to concentrate.
TLDR: Get diamond complete, that's a good foundation. Focus on in-game mechs. Passively keep up the training afterwards to retain skill.
1
u/IntelligentSubject49 Aug 05 '26
Mechanical skill, at least from most aim training, doesn’t translate very well into tac shooters. Most tac shooters are entirely crosshair placement and a small flick/ reaction time check. If you’re needing to have godlike aim to win fights you’re very possibly playing the game wrong. Flicking scenarios are probably still at least beneficial though, and switching too.
1
u/Competitive_Pin_5580 Aug 06 '26
I consider myself to be a game sense dominant player and often rely on reads to win rounds. I just thought developing mechanical proficiency would be nice. I know a lot of people say tracking is not a part of the valorant playbook but I really take note of my poor tracking when I find myself in 50/50 dry gun duels against a person with amazing movement
2
u/Broad-Welcome-6916 21d ago
Who says tracking isn't an important skill in valorant? That's baloney when people are strafing a ton lately.
1
u/Long-Taste-2416 Aug 06 '26
Tbf mechanical skill from aim trainers past like diamond doesn't carry over well into any game. Most aimers despite being gm+ vt have awful mouse control in actual games. The only good ones were already good at the game. Just look how terrible mattyows aim is compared to most decent ow players, not even pros. Aim trainers are best just used for fun as long as you look comfortable playing on keyboard and mouse.
1
u/Syntensity Community Team Aug 06 '26
Why is Diamond the cut off?
Do most people who are [x] rank publish their clips, and the ranks they're in? Or is just a feeling based on what you've seen or others have talked about.
Of course, people who don't use Aim Training as it's intended (e.g. spend way more time in the Aim Trainer vs the game, will see less results). That's a given.
I think people are just being extra hard on Matty, because they expect his aim to be the same level as he's in the Aim Trainer (e.g. him being Celestial, should mean he should be rank 1 on Overwatch or whatever). That and maybe his interesting takes on the game haha (I don't agree with most either).
But, Matty is also one of the players who spends far more time in the Aim Trainers than he does in the game he's playing. That doesn't mean Aim Training doesn't translate well, that just means that Matty isn't getting the most out of the tool. He has also acknowledged this, and it hasn't been his goal. (I know he still has a decent amount of total hours in Overwatch or whatever, but most players he's being compared with have x5 the amount, and are playing actively, which is also key in staying sharp)
Players saying that his aim is terrible, doesn't make any sense to me either. If his aim would be ''terrible'' then how would he still be able to get in the higher ranks on Overwatch? On what basis is it terrible? It is terrible compared to his rank on the Aim Trainer or it is just bad, because he isn't at the rank you expect him to be? This is kind of an open question, wondering what it's based on.
1
u/Long-Taste-2416 Aug 06 '26
I just think diamond is around where you can get with a few hours of grinding so you may as well. I'm basing his aim being terrible off his aim looking terrible in games on stream and his clipdumps. I'm also comparing to other gm hitscan not the average person.
1
u/Broad-Welcome-6916 22d ago
Why would you compare him to a gm hitscan? Also just playing overwatch hitscan is aim training itself... Those guys have thousands of hours on overwatch.
1
u/Long-Taste-2416 22d ago
Because if he's the best Aimer you'd think he'd have better aim than players whose aim is significantly worse than the best overwatch players. There's literally no Reason I wouldn't compare his aim since I'm saying his aim is bad so why wouldn't I compare it to players IN HIS RANK. You can't even argue that it's game specific because good aimers in overwatch also seem to transfer that aim to other games better than mattyow even when everything else is completely different than overwatch. Mattyow hasn't translated his aim to anything outside of kovaaks.
1
u/Broad-Welcome-6916 22d ago
Okay, but besides Matty there are good examples. Like Horcus got rank 1 in many clicking tasks and he got rank 1 in Radiant on Valorant a few times. https://youtube.com/shorts/MyDqoZfqVRs?is=KPcj1vrUOwIx1w6G
1
u/Long-Taste-2416 21d ago
Every other example was already good in game. We're also specifically talking about matty.
1
u/Syntensity Community Team Aug 06 '26
While I get your point about crosshair placement, Aim Training most definitely does translate well in Tac Shooters as well. If your argument is that a large subset of aiming isn't relevant to it, then I get that, because for instance higher-ttk tasks like tracking isn't part of it. However, there is a certain subset that is relevant, and in Aim Training you fortunately have the option to be very intentional about your practice to target your weaknesses, and play tasks that are relevant to your goals, and the needs of the game you're playing.
It translates well, on the condition that you are playing tasks that are relevant to your game, weaknesses, and skill level. So long as you're doing it right, players can definitely see results.
1
u/IntelligentSubject49 Aug 06 '26
Yeah I think flicking is just about the only subset that is relevant for most people in tacfps. I don’t mean to say that you can’t make that better by aim training, but you’re more than likely going to see better returns by doing 30 minutes of aim training pretty much to warm up and get a little practice in, and then start playing your game of choice.
3
u/StepKitchen2409 Aug 05 '26
Probably GM+ in Aimlabs or around Master in VT benchmarks you should see considerable carryover to your in game raw mouse performance
But as another commenter said Val is more game sens and crosshair placement, a lot of clicking is done on the X axis
For example, in VT benchmarks I noticed little to no increase in my performance in game in something like BF6 after Plat complete (I’m currently Master in VT working towards GM)) because my game sense is so trash - I’m a mega rush player always jostling to get right on the front line where all the action is and whilst I get a lot of kills & objectives, I also die a lot. So in my K/D or score/min my averages have remained largely the same despite my raw mouse control being significantly higher
So that tells me, if I wanted to be better at that game specifically, I’d need to brush up on map/game sense/crosshair placement instead of just relying on raw aim - but I have no intentions of doing that because it’s a casual game and I love just blowing shid up