There are certain decks and classes for which going second and having the coin is an advantage. It's not a universal truth that going first is always best. Rogues and Mages in particular have a variety of decks where having The Coin is a plus for combos and/or spells. And there are certain decks where choosing from four opening cards is superior to choosing from just three.
That all said, there is no denying that for the majority of decks and situations there's a slight but distinct advantage of going first. The OP's results cited above are both illuminating and a tad flukey.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Dependable loan sharks since 1960. We sink our teeth into every deal we make.
To clarify, I won each of the 7 games in which I went first, and I lost each of the 3 games in which I went second.
I've been playing a lot of Arena lately. These results are making me re-evaluate how I use the coin and mulligan as the second player.
Could you elaborate about using the coin? I'm trying to learn ^^
That's just it - I don't know.
I've always just used the coin to get something on the board as quickly as I could, even if it meant having no follow-up.
Conceptually I'm going to start thinking about how to the use the coin to become the active player, as opposed to just getting something out there. Those are usually the same thing, but the latter seems clumsy. Also, I think I'm going to start mulliganing more aggressively for 1- and 2-drops as second player, even at the expense of 3-drops. Then again, maybe I should be trying to coin a good 3-drop - I don't know. It just seems too hard to come back if you miss a drop on curve unless you're a mage, rogue, or paladin with divine shield stuff.
I'm also starting to think more in terms of cards that are good as the active player vs. those that are good as the reactive player. My priest deck was a great active-player deck since its strategy was to play big minions on curve that the reacting player had difficulty dealing with. The cards were too expensive for a reactive deck. As a reacting player, it seems you have to have cheaper cards in order to both deal with a threat and get your own on the board.
For thousands of players playing 100 000s of games, the average win rate with the coin is 10% lower than going first: Which is damn significant.
Not even close to 10%. The well-known Blizzcon analysis presented a couple years ago had the advantage at only 1.3%. The last number I saw posted at Hearthstats was only 0.9%. And while Blizzard is nefariously mum on the topic, Ben Brode insists the advantage is minimal and shrinks as the quality of the two players increases. To help emphasize the latter point the players going second actually won a couple more games in the 2015 World Championship. Although admittedly that's a very small sample size. Don't know if anyone has churned out the numbers for other tournaments.
So yes, it's an advantage, but not a huge one. The best way Hearthstone balances things out is that there's a 50-50 chance of going first.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Dependable loan sharks since 1960. We sink our teeth into every deal we make.
There are certain decks and classes for which going second and having the coin is an advantage. It's not a universal truth that going first is always best. Rogues and Mages in particular have a variety of decks where having The Coin is a plus for combos and/or spells. And there are certain decks where choosing from four opening cards is superior to choosing from just three.
That all said, there is no denying that for the majority of decks and situations there's a slight but distinct advantage of going first. The OP's results cited above are both illuminating and a tad flukey.
Maybe in theory because in practice every single class has a winning percentage drop from 10 to 4% when going second. You should check Kripp's video when he posted the static results from Heartharena, sample size was hundreds of thousands of games.
Great video! Thanks so much for pointing me to it. I always knew that going first was a much more significant advantage in Arena. After all, Arena is all about playing on curve and going first means having the first minion on the board. Nonetheless, I had no idea it was such a staggering difference. It also makes me wonder whether some of the numbers I've seen in the past for constructed play are obsolete. I strongly suspect that the numbers for constructed, while certainly not as bad as Arena, have probably taken a turn for the worse as well.
Definitely an eye-opening moment.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Dependable loan sharks since 1960. We sink our teeth into every deal we make.
Kripp's statistics were specifically in relation to Arena where the average winrate for going first has ballooned from 3-4% in the original set up to 9-10% in TGT/OG metas. His analysis does not relate to constructed where I believe Blizz has been working to keep this more balanced but going first has always been an advantage based on the raw numbers.
As a reacting player, it seems you have to have cheaper cards in order to both deal with a threat and get your own on the board.
Or just BrokeBack it with Firelands Portal x3 like my last opponent after I was 2-2 :/
Uh, yeah. I just finished a 7-3 run as Paladin. Luckily I only played against three Mages in the run, losing against two. Was very salty after I lost to the triple Firelands Portal in one game.
Seriously, Blizzard, this card needs to be a rare in Arena. Now.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
If you guessed 7, you were right!
As I looked at my other recent games, the trend towards losing as second player is there, but I've never seen anything so blatant.
So a tip for doing well at Arena: always go first!
I think that is really a tip for life.
Whether your talking about arena in Hearthstone or a gang bang in Daytona Florida always go first.
To clarify, I won each of the 7 games in which I went first, and I lost each of the 3 games in which I went second.
I've been playing a lot of Arena lately. These results are making me re-evaluate how I use the coin and mulligan as the second player.
As comeback mechanics become more scarce, this will continue to be the trend Im afraid.
yeah, going second sux so much...
For thousands of players playing 100 000s of games, the average win rate with the coin is 10% lower than going first:
Which is damn significant.
There are certain decks and classes for which going second and having the coin is an advantage. It's not a universal truth that going first is always best. Rogues and Mages in particular have a variety of decks where having The Coin is a plus for combos and/or spells. And there are certain decks where choosing from four opening cards is superior to choosing from just three.
That all said, there is no denying that for the majority of decks and situations there's a slight but distinct advantage of going first. The OP's results cited above are both illuminating and a tad flukey.
Dependable loan sharks since 1960. We sink our teeth into every deal we make.
Dependable loan sharks since 1960. We sink our teeth into every deal we make.
Dependable loan sharks since 1960. We sink our teeth into every deal we make.
Kripp's statistics were specifically in relation to Arena where the average winrate for going first has ballooned from 3-4% in the original set up to 9-10% in TGT/OG metas. His analysis does not relate to constructed where I believe Blizz has been working to keep this more balanced but going first has always been an advantage based on the raw numbers.