Hearthpwn

Quote from Liquirius »

Ran the script again, but! I noticed I'm a moron and the first time I ran the script the numbers seemed a bit low compared to the numbers given by other people so I adjusted it for the '0 star' (1 more star for each rank, that is simply not correct). This means the math part was ok but the 'yes that is how hearthstone ladder works' part was not. Changed it now, here are the numbers, given in jpgs so that my post does not get deleted by spam bot again :P Also an example graph of a great streak at 80wr which brings us to legend and an average streak at 52wr which does not. Did the sims for 12 mins/game and 2/4 hours played a day, which gives us 300 and 600 games to achieve legend in a month.

The applications are: Do not try to get legend if you play only 2 hours a day unless you're super pro. Even with 62% win chance getting legend is not that reliable (below 90% chance).

Great, thanks for that.  I think it's still pretty reasonable at 2 hours per day.  With a 60% win ratio you have better than even odds of hitting legend, which means that you can reasonably expect to make it within 2 months.

Quote from Magiliene »

I had a conversation with someone on another post about win Percentages. They really mean nothing in the grand scheme of things. Speaking theoretically you can get to legend with a 1% win ratio. Its just a matter of how many games you play. The main issue comes from the fact that winning 51% tells you nothing about how often you actually win. It just says that out of the games you have played you have won ~51% of them. 

haha, sure! win 50 games in a row, get legend, then lose you next 5000 in a row! lol

You can have a 1% winrate and still make it to legend.

From rank 25 to legend, you need 62 consecutive wins.

If you lose 6138 times in a row then win 62 times in a row, you'll hit legend.

62wins/6200games = 1% winrate

Yes it's soo possible! Did a quick count, winning 62 times in a row with a 1% win rate is a bit less (around 10000x less) possible than getting hit by 7 meteorites and a lightning strike simultaneously. Losing (surrendering) 6138 times would take you at least 5 hours a day for a month. Winning 64 times in a row with an amazing win rate of 80% (I don't think anyone can reliably achieve such a win rate, luck is a deciding factor too many times) is around 1/50000000. And I don't think surrendering can be aplied to count an actual win rate. It all depends on how you understand these words, if you insist on understanding it as games won/games played, doesn't matter how you lost (by surrendering in this case, if you 'tried' to actually play these 6000 games, getting to legend would by no means be possible due to time limits), if someone was a real pro and devoted himself to getting legend with a 1% overall month win rate, it would be possible. If 'win rate' is the measure of how many of the games you actually try to win you win, getting legend with 1% win rate is not possible.

Climbing to legend is alot easier if you adapt to the meta and pick decks that work well against what you are seeing your opponent play. I'm by no means a amazing player and due to limited time I usually don't bother with anything that provides less than 60% win ratios. With the right deck it's pretty reasonable to achieve 65-70% winrate atleast till Rank 5 (gets easiers as the season progresses) and I'd say 55-60% doable from there. Right now things like Hunter, Rogue and Mage work pretty well. I'd say Rogue is the best budget option right now. It doesn't require any legendary except Loatheb.

If you hit legend at 51% ur legend rank would be so low it would be embarrassing to show it. At least at ranks 3, 4, 5 you could be the guy who wins 65% of the time and just doesn't play that much.