Seriously, all day today I have been playing Shaman and Paladin, and I put in either 1 or 2 copies of Hungry Crab, for all the Murloc Shamans that I anticapated would flood the meta after the nerfs. I didnt meet 1 Murloc Shaman playing with Hungry Crab, and whenever I switched to a deck without it, like Mage for example, I get matched with Murloc Shaman!!!
Why does the match maker system do that? LOL It frustrating to tech and not even get to feelsgoodman even once!
I finally opened Kadgar, so I tried my first game with Spell Mage today, and got wrecked by turn 5 from good old Murloc Shaman!! lol
Be prepared for “tinfoil hat” idiotic comments bro.
But, as a statistician, I can attest that it does seem awfully suspicious when it happens with 60-70% consistency. Numbers don't lie, but no one is going to spend time compiling these types of stats on a stupid game. Oh well. I feel ya mate.
Seriously, all day today I have been playing Shaman and Paladin, and I put in either 1 or 2 copies of Hungry Crab, for all the Murloc Shamans that I anticapated would flood the meta after the nerfs. I didnt meet 1 Murloc Shaman playing with Hungry Crab, and whenever I switched to a deck without it, like Mage for example, I get matched with Murloc Shaman!!!
Why does the match maker system do that? LOL It frustrating to tech and not even get to feelsgoodman even once!
I finally opened Kadgar, so I tried my first game with Spell Mage today, and got wrecked by turn 5 from good old Murloc Shaman!! lol
It is the matching system, it scan your deck, if find any Hungry Crab then never, not once, will be matched vs any murlock deck. :P
that always happens dude, ha ha. It's why I try to avoid tech choices unless a deck really has room to afford the experimentation.
probably be a good time to play a control deck though I'd imagine. I'm quite busy with WoW right now so not played HS much, but generally I find if aggro decks are running amok, a good control deck or controlling mid range deck sorts them right out. (a good overload shaman is probably quite good right now, I know it was a few weeks back anyway)
Seriously, all day today I have been playing Shaman and Paladin, and I put in either 1 or 2 copies of Hungry Crab, for all the Murloc Shamans that I anticapated would flood the meta after the nerfs. I didnt meet 1 Murloc Shaman playing with Hungry Crab, and whenever I switched to a deck without it, like Mage for example, I get matched with Murloc Shaman!!!
Why does the match maker system do that? LOL It frustrating to tech and not even get to feelsgoodman even once!
I finally opened Kadgar, so I tried my first game with Spell Mage today, and got wrecked by turn 5 from good old Murloc Shaman!! lol
It is the matching system, it scan your deck, if find any Hungry Crab then never, not once, will be matched vs any murlock deck. :P
Teching Hungry Crab is so bad actually, you increase your winrate against Murloc Shaman for a few %, but you decrease every other matchup also, so in the end, unless you met like 70% murloc deck, you're going to hurt your overall winrate.
Played Hunter today, faced off against Big Mage. Switched to Big Mage, faced off vs Hunter. The tech/swap is o_O tbh. Next up, gonna start playing E.M.P. card to deal with mechs in decks... Not really, but I think you can see where this goes, right? It's nutty how the game can be sometimes. Some days are good for climb, some days you eat the butt off the chair so to speak.
Be prepared for “tinfoil hat” idiotic comments bro.
But, as a statistician, I can attest that it does seem awfully suspicious when it happens with 60-70% consistency. Numbers don't lie, but no one is going to spend time compiling these types of stats on a stupid game. Oh well. I feel ya mate.
So, Mr. “statistician” (who just grabs a random 60-70% confirmation biased “statistic” out of thin air), how exactly is this supposed to work?
Where are the posts about the guys winning all their games because of being matched against perfect opponents all the time? Or how does that fit into your statistics, that 60-70% of all games you are matched against your counter?
Are they all bots? Russians that blizzard hired to actively play counter decks to a select set of people? I’m sure they also mess with the shown rank of the opponent right? You can’t guarantee a perfect counter signing up around your rank at the exact same time, so surely they also fiddle with this number...
Since you are a “statistician”, as you so eloquently put it, you must have some basic understanding of math. Have you given any thought into the calculations needed to on the fly evaluate card weights of all decks, down to selected tech cards, on all possible opponents? Yea, didn’t really think so.
This “theory” doesn’t even deserve to be marked as a tinfoil conspiracy, as it is so overwhelmingly stupid and unfeasible, that it would be an insult to other tinfoil conspiracies
Seriously, all day today I have been playing Shaman and Paladin, and I put in either 1 or 2 copies of Hungry Crab, for all the Murloc Shamans that I anticapated would flood the meta after the nerfs. I didnt meet 1 Murloc Shaman playing with Hungry Crab, and whenever I switched to a deck without it, like Mage for example, I get matched with Murloc Shaman!!!
Why does the match maker system do that? LOL It frustrating to tech and not even get to feelsgoodman even once!
I finally opened Kadgar, so I tried my first game with Spell Mage today, and got wrecked by turn 5 from good old Murloc Shaman!! lol
Go test it. Right now. Play 100 games, make a very obvious tech card change, play another 100 game. See what happens and STFU.
What is obvious to me, is that people talking about confirmation bias, are extremely casual netdeckers who don't ever do changes in their deck and play 3 games a week. So you have never actually seen how the matchmaking system works. THIS is confirmation bias.
Go test it. Right now. Play 100 games, make a very obvious tech card change, play another 100 game. See what happens and STFU.
I too enjoy wearing tinfoil hats during this time of year. They're quite comfortable.
I'm a very rational person and you won't hurt me with this low quality trolling. I don't care what you think, I only care what I know. I know the matchmaking has rules, for both players.
Teching against one deck makes you less likely to face said deck, this is fact, not opinion, I can prove i' m right (again, go play 100 games with and without tech) and you cannot prove I'm wrong. This does not mean the other player is more likely to face decks he counters by the way.
So, did you test it? No you did not, obviously. Who is really wearing the tinfoil hat? Your opinion comes from pure void energy. My opinion comes from proven facts. Facts that I believe to be proven anyway. Because you do understand I will not feed you any longer and I will not play 200 games to prove to you something you can prove to yourself.
I'm a very rational person and you won't hurt me with this low quality trolling. I don't care what you think, I only care what I know. I know the matchmaking has rules, for both players.
Teching against one deck makes you less likely to face said deck, this is fact, not opinion, I can prove i' m right (again, go play 100 games with and without tech) and you cannot prove I'm wrong. This does not mean the other player is more likely to face decks he counters by the way.
So, did you test it? No you did not, obviously. Who is really wearing the tinfoil hat? Your opinion comes from pure void energy. My opinion comes from proven facts. Facts that I believe to be proven anyway. Because you do understand I will not feed you any longer and I will not play 200 games to prove to you something you can prove to yourself.
Sorry for the bad English.
TL;DR: I'm right and I have facts which I believe to be true but I actually don't have any facts at all which is why I'm not showing them.
You're the one who's claiming this ridiculous conspiracy to be true. The burden of proof is on you.
Teching Hungry Crab is so bad actually, you increase your winrate against Murloc Shaman for a few %, but you decrease every other matchup also, so in the end, unless you met like 70% murloc deck, you're going to hurt your overall winrate.
That is the thing. He did see 70% shamans. Until he made the change.
He made the correct change and the game punished him for it with very simple rules. There's not conspiracy... That's how a matchmaking works (in every online game with matchmaking), it's not just trying to find you the closest fastest opponent.
Have you not noticed that tier 1 decks and absolute meme decks have trouble finding an opponent quickly sometimes? Well that's just another rule, if possible the matchmaking won't put you against someone that cannot win or cannot lose. Playing odd paladin in Wild sometimes takes me a full minute to find an opponent, switching to a regular tier 2-3 deck and it happens instantly, at the same time of the day of course.
But yeah, let's just scream tinfoil hat, make fun of it, blizzard conspiracy, lololol. Tinfoil hat team has no argument to prove their point, other than "did you make calculations ? Because I will not do it, you're so wrong lol"
People are actually, genuinely idiotic to think the matchmaking does not have rules based on cards and decks that are being played.
I'm a very rational person and you won't hurt me with this low quality trolling. I don't care what you think, I only care what I know. I know the matchmaking has rules, for both players.
Teching against one deck makes you less likely to face said deck, this is fact, not opinion, I can prove i' m right (again, go play 100 games with and without tech) and you cannot prove I'm wrong. This does not mean the other player is more likely to face decks he counters by the way.
So, did you test it? No you did not, obviously. Who is really wearing the tinfoil hat? Your opinion comes from pure void energy. My opinion comes from proven facts. Facts that I believe to be proven anyway. Because you do understand I will not feed you any longer and I will not play 200 games to prove to you something you can prove to yourself.
Sorry for the bad English.
TL;DR: I'm right and I have facts which I believe to be true but I actually don't have any facts at all which is why I'm not showing them.
You're the one who's claiming this ridiculous conspiracy to be true. The burden of proof is on you.
There is no conspiracy the matchmaking system is working as it should be. Non-rigged matchmaking is no matchmaking at all and tier 1 decks would break the game.
The absurd conspiracy is actually to think the matchmaking system does not have any rules based on the cards. The burden of proof is on you my friend. I explained to you how to generate this proof.
Are you asking me to play these 200 games for you? You will never admit that you were wrong. I know you, human. This is why I advise you to prove it to yourself.
You refuse to play the 200 games and accuse me to not have any fact. What are your facts? If you won't show me your facts, do as I did. Show me a way to get to the facts myself.
Can you prove the OP did not see any less Murloc Shaman after the tech card change? Will you still claim it's confirmation bias if a decktracker tells its' not?
Show this decktracker and these facts you're so sure of then? If you have undisputable facts then why are you going around in circles? Just show them and shut me up once and for all. Shouldn't be that hard to do, right?
As long as you're incapable of doing so, you will remain a delusional person in my, and many other's, eyes.
We're all capable of doing it. As I said I won't bother doing it publically and scientifically because it would take insane amount of work to appear credible in the eyes of people like you, I don't have any science/math background I have no interest in that and my 5 years into the game have shown me on every occasion that the matchmaking is rigged far beyond the confirmation bias. I came here to share my opinion not to change other's. You are being a huge dick for not providing proof to you, but you not only don't have proof yourself, you also don't have counter argument. In what world am I delusional and you're not?
Why should you be right and me be wrong if none of us have proof (which I do have, just not in a way that would ever convince you) ? I claim that anyone can find the proof with semi-scientific, reliable method (100 games with tech, 100 games without tech) which is great and a lot better than me showing this semi scientific proof to you. Don't wanna do it? Fine. But you're as much delusional as anyone in these circumstances. At the very least you could find arguments to why this method cannot be trusted but you don't care about that, you only care about "conspiracy". Why is there even talk about conspiracy this is again, normal matchmaking behavior.
Tell me what you think is wrong about everything I said and tell me why. I couldn't care less about your proof. But without your argument it's very difficult to discuss.
Seriously, all day today I have been playing Shaman and Paladin, and I put in either 1 or 2 copies of Hungry Crab, for all the Murloc Shamans that I anticapated would flood the meta after the nerfs. I didnt meet 1 Murloc Shaman playing with Hungry Crab, and whenever I switched to a deck without it, like Mage for example, I get matched with Murloc Shaman!!!
Why does the match maker system do that? LOL It frustrating to tech and not even get to feelsgoodman even once!
I finally opened Kadgar, so I tried my first game with Spell Mage today, and got wrecked by turn 5 from good old Murloc Shaman!! lol
Be prepared for “tinfoil hat” idiotic comments bro.
But, as a statistician, I can attest that it does seem awfully suspicious when it happens with 60-70% consistency. Numbers don't lie, but no one is going to spend time compiling these types of stats on a stupid game. Oh well. I feel ya mate.
It is the matching system, it scan your deck, if find any Hungry Crab then never, not once, will be matched vs any murlock deck. :P
Two words: Confirmation bias.
that always happens dude, ha ha. It's why I try to avoid tech choices unless a deck really has room to afford the experimentation.
probably be a good time to play a control deck though I'd imagine. I'm quite busy with WoW right now so not played HS much, but generally I find if aggro decks are running amok, a good control deck or controlling mid range deck sorts them right out. (a good overload shaman is probably quite good right now, I know it was a few weeks back anyway)
this must be the explanation
Teching Hungry Crab is so bad actually, you increase your winrate against Murloc Shaman for a few %, but you decrease every other matchup also, so in the end, unless you met like 70% murloc deck, you're going to hurt your overall winrate.
Played Hunter today, faced off against Big Mage. Switched to Big Mage, faced off vs Hunter. The tech/swap is o_O tbh. Next up, gonna start playing E.M.P. card to deal with mechs in decks... Not really, but I think you can see where this goes, right? It's nutty how the game can be sometimes. Some days are good for climb, some days you eat the butt off the chair so to speak.
So, Mr. “statistician” (who just grabs a random 60-70% confirmation biased “statistic” out of thin air), how exactly is this supposed to work?
Where are the posts about the guys winning all their games because of being matched against perfect opponents all the time? Or how does that fit into your statistics, that 60-70% of all games you are matched against your counter?
Are they all bots? Russians that blizzard hired to actively play counter decks to a select set of people? I’m sure they also mess with the shown rank of the opponent right? You can’t guarantee a perfect counter signing up around your rank at the exact same time, so surely they also fiddle with this number...
Since you are a “statistician”, as you so eloquently put it, you must have some basic understanding of math. Have you given any thought into the calculations needed to on the fly evaluate card weights of all decks, down to selected tech cards, on all possible opponents? Yea, didn’t really think so.
This “theory” doesn’t even deserve to be marked as a tinfoil conspiracy, as it is so overwhelmingly stupid and unfeasible, that it would be an insult to other tinfoil conspiracies
Well... match maker system did nothing.
Two words : Absolutely not.
Go test it. Right now. Play 100 games, make a very obvious tech card change, play another 100 game. See what happens and STFU.
What is obvious to me, is that people talking about confirmation bias, are extremely casual netdeckers who don't ever do changes in their deck and play 3 games a week. So you have never actually seen how the matchmaking system works. THIS is confirmation bias.
I too enjoy wearing tinfoil hats during this time of year. They're quite comfortable.
I'm a very rational person and you won't hurt me with this low quality trolling. I don't care what you think, I only care what I know. I know the matchmaking has rules, for both players.
Teching against one deck makes you less likely to face said deck, this is fact, not opinion, I can prove i' m right (again, go play 100 games with and without tech) and you cannot prove I'm wrong. This does not mean the other player is more likely to face decks he counters by the way.
So, did you test it? No you did not, obviously. Who is really wearing the tinfoil hat? Your opinion comes from pure void energy. My opinion comes from proven facts. Facts that I believe to be proven anyway. Because you do understand I will not feed you any longer and I will not play 200 games to prove to you something you can prove to yourself.
Sorry for the bad English.
TL;DR: I'm right and I have facts which I believe to be true but I actually don't have any facts at all which is why I'm not showing them.
You're the one who's claiming this ridiculous conspiracy to be true. The burden of proof is on you.
That is the thing. He did see 70% shamans. Until he made the change.
He made the correct change and the game punished him for it with very simple rules. There's not conspiracy... That's how a matchmaking works (in every online game with matchmaking), it's not just trying to find you the closest fastest opponent.
Have you not noticed that tier 1 decks and absolute meme decks have trouble finding an opponent quickly sometimes? Well that's just another rule, if possible the matchmaking won't put you against someone that cannot win or cannot lose. Playing odd paladin in Wild sometimes takes me a full minute to find an opponent, switching to a regular tier 2-3 deck and it happens instantly, at the same time of the day of course.
But yeah, let's just scream tinfoil hat, make fun of it, blizzard conspiracy, lololol. Tinfoil hat team has no argument to prove their point, other than "did you make calculations ? Because I will not do it, you're so wrong lol"
People are actually, genuinely idiotic to think the matchmaking does not have rules based on cards and decks that are being played.
The matchmaking is suspected to be rigged in such a way.
I wonder when the hypocritical thieves from Blizzard will finally admit it...
There is no conspiracy the matchmaking system is working as it should be. Non-rigged matchmaking is no matchmaking at all and tier 1 decks would break the game.
The absurd conspiracy is actually to think the matchmaking system does not have any rules based on the cards. The burden of proof is on you my friend. I explained to you how to generate this proof.
Are you asking me to play these 200 games for you? You will never admit that you were wrong. I know you, human. This is why I advise you to prove it to yourself.
You refuse to play the 200 games and accuse me to not have any fact. What are your facts? If you won't show me your facts, do as I did. Show me a way to get to the facts myself.
Can you prove the OP did not see any less Murloc Shaman after the tech card change? Will you still claim it's confirmation bias if a decktracker tells its' not?
Show this decktracker and these facts you're so sure of then? If you have undisputable facts then why are you going around in circles? Just show them and shut me up once and for all. Shouldn't be that hard to do, right?
As long as you're incapable of doing so, you will remain a delusional person in my, and many other's, eyes.
We're all capable of doing it. As I said I won't bother doing it publically and scientifically because it would take insane amount of work to appear credible in the eyes of people like you, I don't have any science/math background I have no interest in that and my 5 years into the game have shown me on every occasion that the matchmaking is rigged far beyond the confirmation bias. I came here to share my opinion not to change other's. You are being a huge dick for not providing proof to you, but you not only don't have proof yourself, you also don't have counter argument. In what world am I delusional and you're not?
Why should you be right and me be wrong if none of us have proof (which I do have, just not in a way that would ever convince you) ? I claim that anyone can find the proof with semi-scientific, reliable method (100 games with tech, 100 games without tech) which is great and a lot better than me showing this semi scientific proof to you. Don't wanna do it? Fine. But you're as much delusional as anyone in these circumstances. At the very least you could find arguments to why this method cannot be trusted but you don't care about that, you only care about "conspiracy". Why is there even talk about conspiracy this is again, normal matchmaking behavior.
Tell me what you think is wrong about everything I said and tell me why. I couldn't care less about your proof. But without your argument it's very difficult to discuss.
Sorry for the bad English again
https://www.logicallyfallacious.com/tools/lp/Bo/LogicalFallacies/145/Proving-Non-Existence