Hearthpwn

Disturbing to see how much humans fail with feelings vs probability.

Read up some science, yo!

Quote from Aegis24 >>

I'm just saying, look how often each class you play or play against gets their optimal 1 drop on turn one.  Mana Wyrm, Nothshire Cleric, etc all have very high rates of being in the opening hand, seemingly higher than is statistically likely.  How hard would it be to "weight" certain cards to maintain game flow?  How hard would it be to turn said weight off in the event of a win streak?

This goes well beyond salty, this is why large chunks of humanity are superstitious and worse. You don't make yourselves look smart with this sort of crap, it's literally like waving a flag declaring yourself a total fool. Becasue of brains like this humanity is destined to remain in the gutter...

Even ignoring the fact that there's no evidence to support this ("it feels like this happens a lot" isn't conclusive), it would be obscenely difficult to manipulate the rng subtly enough that it isn't immediately exposed, but meaningfully enough to achieve your goals -especially when they can get the same effect through nerfing cards.

Besides, if they were willing to falsify rng, we never would have had Shamanstone for so long last year.

Ha, I love these threads.  Many have pointed out the terrible analysis, but my favorite part is the faulty logic. 

If there is a 50% winrate algorithm in operation, how does this promote spending on cards?  I believe the effect would be to dissuade spending, as your more costly collection and my cheap collection would be weighted to perform similarly well within the game, thus reducing any need to gain additional cards in order to improve one's winrate.

It is natural for a person to sense patterns in random events, that's what people are good at after all.  The problem is that randomness doesn't care about what people think.

OP is correct.  Just play on multiple accounts and see if you think it is still random.  The 50% thing is crap though - why would Blizzard benefit from a 50% win ratio?  I think it has more to do with monetizing new players by duping them into thinking the game is easier than it really is.  Not sure what I did but I finally got out of the RNG doghouse recently and got back on the list of blizzard's 'special people'.  

Tinfoil hat - nope, sorry.  Since no one knows the 'rules' for who benefits and who gets screwed, you can't prove or disprove it, no matter what volume of statistics may be available.

Quote from Matrix801 >>

OP is correct.  Just play on multiple accounts and see if you think it is still random.  The 50% thing is crap though - why would Blizzard benefit from a 50% win ratio?  I think it has more to do with monetizing new players by duping them into thinking the game is easier than it really is.  Not sure what I did but I finally got out of the RNG doghouse recently and got back on the list of blizzard's 'special people'.  

Tinfoil hat - nope, sorry.  Since no one knows the 'rules' for who benefits and who gets screwed, you can't prove or disprove it, no matter what volume of statistics may be available.

Quote from Crazy_Gio >>

Quote from Matrix801 >>

OP is correct.  Just play on multiple accounts and see if you think it is still random.  The 50% thing is crap though - why would Blizzard benefit from a 50% win ratio?  I think it has more to do with monetizing new players by duping them into thinking the game is easier than it really is.  Not sure what I did but I finally got out of the RNG doghouse recently and got back on the list of blizzard's 'special people'.  

Tinfoil hat - nope, sorry.  Since no one knows the 'rules' for who benefits and who gets screwed, you can't prove or disprove it, no matter what volume of statistics may be available.

 Since you're the one accusing, but you can't present any proof of what you're saying, you're wrong. That's how it works in law: if you're accusing someone you have to present proofs that he's guily, he doesn't need to defend himself if you have no proofs at all. It's like saying that dragons exist because "I can't prove that they don't", it's just stupid.

Quote from Aegis24 >>

I'm just saying, look how often each class you play or play against gets their optimal 1 drop on turn one.  Mana Wyrm, Nothshire Cleric, etc all have very high rates of being in the opening hand, seemingly higher than is statistically likely.  How hard would it be to "weight" certain cards to maintain game flow?  How hard would it be to turn said weight off in the event of a win streak?

Quote from Matrix801 >>

Quote from Crazy_Gio >>

Quote from Matrix801 >>

OP is correct.  Just play on multiple accounts and see if you think it is still random.  The 50% thing is crap though - why would Blizzard benefit from a 50% win ratio?  I think it has more to do with monetizing new players by duping them into thinking the game is easier than it really is.  Not sure what I did but I finally got out of the RNG doghouse recently and got back on the list of blizzard's 'special people'.  

Tinfoil hat - nope, sorry.  Since no one knows the 'rules' for who benefits and who gets screwed, you can't prove or disprove it, no matter what volume of statistics may be available.

 Since you're the one accusing, but you can't present any proof of what you're saying, you're wrong. That's how it works in law: if you're accusing someone you have to present proofs that he's guily, he doesn't need to defend himself if you have no proofs at all. It's like saying that dragons exist because "I can't prove that they don't", it's just stupid.

 Actually, you describe US law.  There are many places where the defendant is obligated to prove themselves innocent of accusations.  That aside, the argument stands - there is no 'law' involved here.  I, and others, have no problem with you thinking you are right.  As I said, it isn't me who is getting screwed out of wins and legendary cards - I pulled 7 in 60 packs.  This means either Blizzard is giving away legendary cards for Christmas and not telling anyone, or (more likely) some other poor schmuck got screwed to fuel my good fortune.

Quote from SN89 >>

Quote from DoubleSummon >>

if (3nnui== winning())

{

firstoppeninghand(swashburgler(),patches(),bonemere());

swashburglar(played(addtohand(frostnova()));

}

actual code ftom the game acording to OP

<off> You know very little about coding. </off>

"I was matched against someone who beat me!  It couldn't POSSIBLY be because i'm reaching the median level of my personal skill, I'M AMAZING AND I'VE NETDECKED THE BEST T1 DECK ONLINE!  It HAS to be because Blizzard is FORCING ME to a 50% winrate for unfathomable reasons!"

Three conspiracy theorists walk into a bar...

You can't tell me that was a coincidence.

Quote from Death_Brute >>

Quote from AxletheBeast >>

If winrates were weighted in the way you're suggesting -- where your success is actively damaged by weighting --  it would be next to impossible for professional players or even just high-ranked players to rise above others. Literally... the existence of players who succeed over others disproves the idea of skewed ranking... unless you think Blizzard is favoring pros... but how would they have even become pros then?

Incidentally there are hoards of logical reasons for bad luck in ladder. Constantly matching against a powerful deck would make sense since those are usually popular, and as people have complained about in identical other threads, sure sometimes you try to pick a deck that counters it and get matched against counters to THAT... but that's how that works too; everyone is trying to counter what each other are playing, which is always a rat race where one deck replaces another constantly.

If you are unable to rise in winrate or in ranking (one or the other must rise), then you are not improving as a player. Blaming statistics with alternate explanations instead of blaming the only consistent factor in your games (you) and improving your play is not going to help you win games.

 They make the game popular by streaming blizzard wants them to be good ;)

Let's look for a second at the definition of Randomness: (Source)

Randomness is the lack of pattern or predictability in events. A random sequence of events, symbols or steps has no order and does not follow an intelligible pattern or combination. Individual random events are by definition unpredictable, but in many cases the frequency of different outcomes over a large number of events (or "trials") is predictable.

So by saying that the game is not random you actually saying it has patterns and it is predictable.

In this case, all you have to do if you want to prove you're right is predict something about your next match based on the what happened in past matches more accurately than a random guess.

More specifically, play a series of hearthstone matches, and before you're hitting the "play" button try to predict who will be your next opponent based on your past results.

In the end check what's your prediction success rate (number of right predictions divided by the number of matches), for example if you played 54 matches and predicted successfully 13 of your opponents, your success rate is  0.24 = 24%.

Your goal is to have better success rate than the naive prediction of picking the same class every time, for example if paladin was the most common opponent in your sample (let's say 18 out of 54 matches), than the naive prediction of guessing your next opponent will be paladin every time will have a success rate of 0.33 = 33%.

 If you can consistently do better than the naive predictor, not only you prove your claims are true, but you also can benefit from the rigging system by exploiting it's predictability. 

Quote from GMAlon >>

Let's look for a second at the definition of Randomness: (Source)

Randomness is the lack of pattern or predictability in events. A random sequence of events, symbols or steps has no order and does not follow an intelligible pattern or combination. Individual random events are by definition unpredictable, but in many cases the frequency of different outcomes over a large number of events (or "trials") is predictable.

So by saying that the game is not random you actually saying it has patterns and it is predictable.

In this case, all you have to do if you want to prove you're right is predict something about your next match based on the what happened in past matches more accurately than a random guess.

More specifically, play a series of hearthstone matches, and before you're hitting the "play" button try to predict who will be your next opponent based on your past results.

In the end check what's your prediction success rate (number of right predictions divided by the number of matches), for example if you played 54 matches and predicted successfully 13 of your opponents, your success rate is  0.24 = 24%.

Your goal is to have better success rate than the naive prediction of picking the same class every time, for example if paladin was the most common opponent in your sample (let's say 18 out of 54 matches), than the naive prediction of guessing your next opponent will be paladin every time will have a success rate of 0.33 = 33%.

 If you can consistently do better than the naive predictor, not only you prove your claims are true, but you also can benefit from the rigging system by exploiting it's predictability.

If you flip a coin and get heads 5 times in a row would you shout rigged? 

Quote from AxletheBeast >>

Quote from GMAlon >>

Let's look for a second at the definition of Randomness: (Source)

Randomness is the lack of pattern or predictability in events. A random sequence of events, symbols or steps has no order and does not follow an intelligible pattern or combination. Individual random events are by definition unpredictable, but in many cases the frequency of different outcomes over a large number of events (or "trials") is predictable.

So by saying that the game is not random you actually saying it has patterns and it is predictable.

In this case, all you have to do if you want to prove you're right is predict something about your next match based on the what happened in past matches more accurately than a random guess.

More specifically, play a series of hearthstone matches, and before you're hitting the "play" button try to predict who will be your next opponent based on your past results.

In the end check what's your prediction success rate (number of right predictions divided by the number of matches), for example if you played 54 matches and predicted successfully 13 of your opponents, your success rate is  0.24 = 24%.

Your goal is to have better success rate than the naive prediction of picking the same class every time, for example if paladin was the most common opponent in your sample (let's say 18 out of 54 matches), than the naive prediction of guessing your next opponent will be paladin every time will have a success rate of 0.33 = 33%.

 If you can consistently do better than the naive predictor, not only you prove your claims are true, but you also can benefit from the rigging system by exploiting it's predictability.

 That example still wouldn't prove any kind of rigging, because Paladin is one of the strongest classes right now so it would be a probably opponent regardless of any kind of rigging. =P

Quote from Matrix801 >>

Quote from Crazy_Gio >>

Quote from Matrix801 >>

OP is correct.  Just play on multiple accounts and see if you think it is still random.  The 50% thing is crap though - why would Blizzard benefit from a 50% win ratio?  I think it has more to do with monetizing new players by duping them into thinking the game is easier than it really is.  Not sure what I did but I finally got out of the RNG doghouse recently and got back on the list of blizzard's 'special people'.  

Tinfoil hat - nope, sorry.  Since no one knows the 'rules' for who benefits and who gets screwed, you can't prove or disprove it, no matter what volume of statistics may be available.

 Since you're the one accusing, but you can't present any proof of what you're saying, you're wrong. That's how it works in law: if you're accusing someone you have to present proofs that he's guily, he doesn't need to defend himself if you have no proofs at all. It's like saying that dragons exist because "I can't prove that they don't", it's just stupid.

 Actually, you describe US law.  There are many places where the defendant is obligated to prove themselves innocent of accusations.  That aside, the argument stands - there is no 'law' involved here.  I, and others, have no problem with you thinking you are right.  As I said, it isn't me who is getting screwed out of wins and legendary cards - I pulled 7 in 60 packs.  This means either Blizzard is giving away legendary cards for Christmas and not telling anyone, or (more likely) some other poor schmuck got screwed to fuel my good fortune.

Being able to fix the daily quest bug should be simple after 3 hotfixes, but people are still having issues.

So I think we can rule out sophisticated programming algorithms.