Luck is part of fun. It is a double edge sword. If the luck is on your side, you will have fun. If it is on your opponent's side, you will be mad. So, calm down yourself and move on to next game.
With all do respect but "fun because of luck" should not define a game that is an official e-sport that has prizepools of hundreds of thousands. I'm sure if you grind enough you will eventually qualify for Worlds. People there all have the same skill. Why don't they just flip a coin, winner gets half a million -_-
Okay but with this logic then professional poker shouldn't exist. And poker is far more luck than skill, but there is still enough required skill to be a repeating top end competitor. With Texas Holdem (the most common tournament poker game) there is literally 0 decision making when it comes to playing cards. The skill comes in the form of bluffing, betting, calling, checking, etc.
There is one factor that is consistent amongst all cards games, and that is that luck will always be a factor. I don't care if it's Pokémon, yugioh, magic, whatever. There will always be a "perfect" opening hand and curve that's possible, and with that there is a form of RNG in them all.
The bottom line is if you can't get over the fact that you will lose to luck from time to time, card games aren't your type of game.
And I would like to expand even further to the point that you can find luck in almost any game there is in some form or another. For example look at most mmos. Even having a crit chance or a proc chance is a form of luck. You can have a 20% crit chance, but might get lucky enough to get 3-4 crits back to back that resulted in a kill that otherwise wouldn't. Or an ability that had a 5-10% to proc something and it happens say 3 times in a row.
Even video games that don't have these things, but have lots of different characters thus different matchups is a form of luck. Someone might get top 4 in a tournament because they got a very lucky matchup roll.
The only types of games completely devoid of all luck are games like Rocket League or CS-GO where every single player is given 100% identical means and must perform their best to succeed with said means. Completely even, no different abilities or random factors, just raw skill.
Luck is part of fun. It is a double edge sword. If the luck is on your side, you will have fun. If it is on your opponent's side, you will be mad. So, calm down yourself and move on to next game.
With all do respect but "fun because of luck" should not define a game that is an official e-sport that has prizepools of hundreds of thousands. I'm sure if you grind enough you will eventually qualify for Worlds. People there all have the same skill. Why don't they just flip a coin, winner gets half a million -_-
MTG Mana floods?
Happens in all games really. Top decking is luck too. I agree with whoever pointed that you can minimize the luck factor by mulliganing, knowing the outs and to some degree counting the odds.
Even Ben Brode has stated earlier as he was part of the team that the chance of getting a counter raises with each win from you. If lets say a specific deck is statisticly better then yours (a counter) you will get matched against these decks more frequently. Chances raise with each win. Once you have a achieves a unlikely high winrate over the course of many games you will notice that the search-time will majorly raise usualy.
And iam 100% (!!!!) sure that they also do it on the rng in some way - thats what makes me quit over and over again. Tell me its conspiracy or somewhat but i've so much data from my deck tracker collected over the last couple of years. Its nowhere close to a real randomness; more likely algorythm that favours or not.
However; its a fun game if you dont take it serious. It nowhere close to be a competitve card game. Just watch Masterships or somewhat. Basicly just RNG kicks in, thats it.
I understand that minimizing the offset of RNG is one of the "skill elements" in this game, but what is the point? I can tactically go through my turns, planning every step, and my opponent can just YOLO and win anyway. If the way you play doesn't matter, how does either player learn anything from those games? Sure it evens out over hundreds of games, but then it still doesn't feel good. It seems that having some sort of way to handle tilt is a lot more useful then actually learning small detail plays. I'm only playing for 3 weeks, but during the HGG for example I see players make all sorts of small mistakes (most commonly: the placement of Faceless Lackey) without any punish. As a perfectionist I like to play in the most optimized way possible, but it feels that those details are overshadowed by every "discover", "random", "x% chance to", ...- type of card.
Anyway, today I was indeed bullied a lot less by luck, and I managed to climb from rank 19 to 14 and it felt a lot more "fun" to me. Again, I don't mind losing if I get outplayed or anything, so this isn't a "salt thread", but the randomness of Hearthstone takes a lot of the competitive entertainment out of it for me.
Most card and dice games involve luck though. Even if it's just down to drawing, you can play poker very well and lose due to it being put of your control. HS has more variables but you can't put that down to everything. It isn't all bad luck, there's a reason you're at such a low rank and other people consistently hit legend. Some people can't get past rank 15, others 10, others are good enough to get to 5 but never legend. People tend to hover around their skill level and it isn't just down to luck whether good or bad.
It's also responsible for a lot of the fun in the game. Cards like Yogg's puzzle box and Brawl only exist because rng exists. Others, like Zuljin, animal companion and the lich king can all throw up results that can swing the game either way and they're very common to see. There are loads of other examples but this game only exists really because degrees of rng are in so many different places within the game that it keeps it unpredictable and varied.
Even Ben Brode has stated earlier as he was part of the team that the chance of getting a counter raises with each win from you. If lets say a specific deck is statisticly better then yours (a counter) you will get matched against these decks more frequently. Chances raise with each win. Once you have a achieves a unlikely high winrate over the course of many games you will notice that the search-time will majorly raise usualy.
And iam 100% (!!!!) sure that they also do it on the rng in some way - thats what makes me quit over and over again. Tell me its conspiracy or somewhat but i've so much data from my deck tracker collected over the last couple of years. Its nowhere close to a real randomness; more likely algorythm that favours or not.
However; its a fun game if you dont take it serious. It nowhere close to be a competitve card game. Just watch Masterships or somewhat. Basicly just RNG kicks in, thats it.
Damn, dude... You know, it is very easy for anyone out there from behind a keyboard to try to incriminate a company as popular and important as Blizzard with absurd charges and accuse them of dishonesty with their customers. If you're going to do such a despicable thing, you should back up your claims with irrefutable evidence and SHOW IT,or just don't say anything at all.
How much luck is involved entirely depends on your deck. Me personally I try to limit RNG as much as possible which is why I run pyroblast instead of yogg box. In my main deck the only real RNG card I run is DQ Alexstrasza. It doesn’t really matter what effects you get from her most of the time she just puts a lot of stats on the board. Beyond that I run a few discover mechanics for flexibility and to give my self a choice rather than blind RNG. Relying too much on RNG can leave games out of your hands which is why I don’t like it. I’m already at the mercy of draw luck, I don’t need other ways for the game to bone me.
On the flip side I hate losing to RNG decks who just happen to RNG the right cards to win rather than having an actual game plan, but shit happens.
Even Ben Brode has stated earlier as he was part of the team that the chance of getting a counter raises with each win from you. If lets say a specific deck is statisticly better then yours (a counter) you will get matched against these decks more frequently. Chances raise with each win. Once you have a achieves a unlikely high winrate over the course of many games you will notice that the search-time will majorly raise usualy.
And iam 100% (!!!!) sure that they also do it on the rng in some way - thats what makes me quit over and over again. Tell me its conspiracy or somewhat but i've so much data from my deck tracker collected over the last couple of years. Its nowhere close to a real randomness; more likely algorythm that favours or not.
However; its a fun game if you dont take it serious. It nowhere close to be a competitve card game. Just watch Masterships or somewhat. Basicly just RNG kicks in, thats it.
Damn, dude... You know, it is very easy for anyone out there from behind a keyboard to try to incriminate a company as popular and important as Blizzard with absurd charges and accuse them of dishonesty with their customers. If you're going to do such a despicable thing, you should back up your claims with irrefutable evidence and SHOW IT,or just don't say anything at all.
It’s a hard thing to prove. He could have tons of data and still you’d call BS because it isn’t explicitly stated. Personally I’ve noticed that after a win streak my mulligans get worse. I imagine it wouldn’t be hard to add a weight factor to mana costs relevant to wins. Whether or not this is the case is anyone’s guess. I can’t deny that it’s odd that when my win rate is around 50-60 % my mulligans are relatively not bad. But if I cross over and start pushing a 70% win rate suddenly my low cost cards are nowhere to be found. If there is some kind of inherent balancing system my guess is that would be it. Much easier to implement than trying to force a counter deck in your face which requires more involved deck analysis within the matchmaking system. Logically it would also make sense to have some kind of shadow code for this from a game standpoint. This can limit the amount of balancing required by keeping win rates manageable as well as help all decks perform in a more streamlined fashion. I’d love to see someone actually run a large test and see what kind of odds they get with their opening hands and then correlate that with wins.
Even Ben Brode has stated earlier as he was part of the team that the chance of getting a counter raises with each win from you. If lets say a specific deck is statisticly better then yours (a counter) you will get matched against these decks more frequently. Chances raise with each win. Once you have a achieves a unlikely high winrate over the course of many games you will notice that the search-time will majorly raise usualy.
And iam 100% (!!!!) sure that they also do it on the rng in some way - thats what makes me quit over and over again. Tell me its conspiracy or somewhat but i've so much data from my deck tracker collected over the last couple of years. Its nowhere close to a real randomness; more likely algorythm that favours or not.
However; its a fun game if you dont take it serious. It nowhere close to be a competitve card game. Just watch Masterships or somewhat. Basicly just RNG kicks in, thats it.
Damn, dude... You know, it is very easy for anyone out there from behind a keyboard to try to incriminate a company as popular and important as Blizzard with absurd charges and accuse them of dishonesty with their customers. If you're going to do such a despicable thing, you should back up your claims with irrefutable evidence and SHOW IT,or just don't say anything at all.
It’s a hard thing to prove. He could have tons of data and still you’d call BS because it isn’t explicitly stated. Personally I’ve noticed that after a win streak my mulligans get worse. I imagine it wouldn’t be hard to add a weight factor to mana costs relevant to wins. Whether or not this is the case is anyone’s guess. I can’t deny that it’s odd that when my win rate is around 50-60 % my mulligans are relatively not bad. But if I cross over and start pushing a 70% win rate suddenly my low cost cards are nowhere to be found. If there is some kind of inherent balancing system my guess is that would be it. Much easier to implement than trying to force a counter deck in your face which requires more involved deck analysis within the matchmaking system. Logically it would also make sense to have some kind of shadow code for this from a game standpoint. This can limit the amount of balancing required by keeping win rates manageable as well as help all decks perform in a more streamlined fashion. I’d love to see someone actually run a large test and see what kind of odds they get with their opening hands and then correlate that with wins.
You're totally wrong. I wouldn't instantly call BS if he showed tons of data. Why would I? I don't give a single f...k about being right or wrong here, not even in real life, I just wanna know the truth, and if someone starts making silly statements about something, he or she should at least show some evidence to back up them, don't you think so?
And are you serious??? Hearthstone is almost six years old and extremely popular, do you really think no one tried to run a large test about this??? C'mon dude, give me a break and stop being so naive.
Even Ben Brode has stated earlier as he was part of the team that the chance of getting a counter raises with each win from you. If lets say a specific deck is statisticly better then yours (a counter) you will get matched against these decks more frequently. Chances raise with each win. Once you have a achieves a unlikely high winrate over the course of many games you will notice that the search-time will majorly raise usualy.
And iam 100% (!!!!) sure that they also do it on the rng in some way - thats what makes me quit over and over again. Tell me its conspiracy or somewhat but i've so much data from my deck tracker collected over the last couple of years. Its nowhere close to a real randomness; more likely algorythm that favours or not.
However; its a fun game if you dont take it serious. It nowhere close to be a competitve card game. Just watch Masterships or somewhat. Basicly just RNG kicks in, thats it.
Damn, dude... You know, it is very easy for anyone out there from behind a keyboard to try to incriminate a company as popular and important as Blizzard with absurd charges and accuse them of dishonesty with their customers. If you're going to do such a despicable thing, you should back up your claims with irrefutable evidence and SHOW IT,or just don't say anything at all.
It’s a hard thing to prove. He could have tons of data and still you’d call BS because it isn’t explicitly stated. Personally I’ve noticed that after a win streak my mulligans get worse. I imagine it wouldn’t be hard to add a weight factor to mana costs relevant to wins. Whether or not this is the case is anyone’s guess. I can’t deny that it’s odd that when my win rate is around 50-60 % my mulligans are relatively not bad. But if I cross over and start pushing a 70% win rate suddenly my low cost cards are nowhere to be found. If there is some kind of inherent balancing system my guess is that would be it. Much easier to implement than trying to force a counter deck in your face which requires more involved deck analysis within the matchmaking system. Logically it would also make sense to have some kind of shadow code for this from a game standpoint. This can limit the amount of balancing required by keeping win rates manageable as well as help all decks perform in a more streamlined fashion. I’d love to see someone actually run a large test and see what kind of odds they get with their opening hands and then correlate that with wins.
You're totally wrong. I wouldn't instantly call BS if he showed tons of data. Why would I? I don't give a single f...k about being right or wrong here, not even in real life, I just wanna know the truth, and if someone starts making silly statements about something, he or she should at least show some evidence to back up them, don't you think so?
And are you serious??? Hearthstone is almost six years old and extremely popular, do you really think no one tried to run a large test about this??? C'mon dude, give me a break and stop being so naive.
There is no luck.Everthing is rigged either for you to win or for you to lose.If you are to win each draw or discover or random effect will be the best possible for the situation and if not the opposite.
RNG haters like to say this a lot, and it's the main fallacy of their viewpoint.
(I take it that "coin flip" here means "a single instance of a randomized effect" and not the actual who-goes-first coin flip.)
Even when it seems like an entire game was decided by one crazy event, that's not really the whole picture. It is the culmination of dozens of other events and hundreds of other decisions that followed those events. To get to that point in the game where the outcome could seemingly hinge on random chance took plenty of skill, as did knowing when to trigger that random effect.
So instead of saying, "That person got lucky," it would be more accurate to say, "That person skillfully navigated the game to a place where a difficult position could be turned around with a favorable result from a random effect." A less skillful player would be unlikely to even get to that point.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Why, you never expected justice from a company, did you? They have neither a soul to lose nor a body to kick." -- Lady Saba Holland
You're a new player and so it's possible you just had a streak of bad luck, but over the course of thousands of matches you'll play if you stick to this game, rng will balance out. You'll be extremely lucky sometimes, and unlucky at other times, but most of the time luck is just average.
If you're too upset by loosing to rng, maybe a card game isn't for you. Try chess or something.
I play YuGiOh and Pokemon TCG competitively as well, where there isn't as much "randomness". It's fun and all, but I can image that if a 300k game is lost due to RNG it must be really frustrating.
Yugioh is absolute garbage at competitive levels in the opposite direction though, where you can shitcycle through 30 cards and get an invincible board in the first turn.
Don't know about pokemon but since they just recently banned a card before it even came out in the US due to it enabling a consistent hand control build that literally burns your opponents whole hand and stops your opponent from drawing anything, I'm pretty sure it's just as bad.
High level hearthstone involves a lot of risk mitigation and playing around possible outcomes. There is RNG, but the point is to make it work for you, not against
Luck is huge, it allows bad players wins. However, a good player will still consistently win more and climb, and still get luck as well.
It's tilting to lose to topdecks, RNG, RNG topdeck crazy 1/1m bs. But that's HS.
For example I lost today to a highlander rogue (notoriously prone to bad draw) who topdecked zilliax, only lethal out. Gets dragon lacky next turn into Alleistraza, into double taunt, into topdeck natural Allie, T9/10/11. Sometimes you're just going to be SOL.
Even Ben Brode has stated earlier as he was part of the team that the chance of getting a counter raises with each win from you. If lets say a specific deck is statisticly better then yours (a counter) you will get matched against these decks more frequently. Chances raise with each win. Once you have a achieves a unlikely high winrate over the course of many games you will notice that the search-time will majorly raise usualy.
And iam 100% (!!!!) sure that they also do it on the rng in some way - thats what makes me quit over and over again. Tell me its conspiracy or somewhat but i've so much data from my deck tracker collected over the last couple of years. Its nowhere close to a real randomness; more likely algorythm that favours or not.
However; its a fun game if you dont take it serious. It nowhere close to be a competitve card game. Just watch Masterships or somewhat. Basicly just RNG kicks in, thats it.
Damn, dude... You know, it is very easy for anyone out there from behind a keyboard to try to incriminate a company as popular and important as Blizzard with absurd charges and accuse them of dishonesty with their customers. If you're going to do such a despicable thing, you should back up your claims with irrefutable evidence and SHOW IT,or just don't say anything at all.
It’s a hard thing to prove. He could have tons of data and still you’d call BS because it isn’t explicitly stated. Personally I’ve noticed that after a win streak my mulligans get worse. I imagine it wouldn’t be hard to add a weight factor to mana costs relevant to wins. Whether or not this is the case is anyone’s guess. I can’t deny that it’s odd that when my win rate is around 50-60 % my mulligans are relatively not bad. But if I cross over and start pushing a 70% win rate suddenly my low cost cards are nowhere to be found. If there is some kind of inherent balancing system my guess is that would be it. Much easier to implement than trying to force a counter deck in your face which requires more involved deck analysis within the matchmaking system. Logically it would also make sense to have some kind of shadow code for this from a game standpoint. This can limit the amount of balancing required by keeping win rates manageable as well as help all decks perform in a more streamlined fashion. I’d love to see someone actually run a large test and see what kind of odds they get with their opening hands and then correlate that with wins.
You're totally wrong. I wouldn't instantly call BS if he showed tons of data. Why would I? I don't give a single f...k about being right or wrong here, not even in real life, I just wanna know the truth, and if someone starts making silly statements about something, he or she should at least show some evidence to back up them, don't you think so?
And are you serious??? Hearthstone is almost six years old and extremely popular, do you really think no one tried to run a large test about this??? C'mon dude, give me a break and stop being so naive.
Jesus... -.-
Show some evidence
LOL, now is it me the one who should show some evidence??? Hilarious, you have to be kidding... I'm not the one who started this shit, dude.
Luck is very important. Many decks have polarized match-ups - you need luck to avoid decks you're weak against. Then there are decks that will just kill you with random cards they get, and you have no option to answer them. You need to avoid such situations with luck as well.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Okay but with this logic then professional poker shouldn't exist. And poker is far more luck than skill, but there is still enough required skill to be a repeating top end competitor. With Texas Holdem (the most common tournament poker game) there is literally 0 decision making when it comes to playing cards. The skill comes in the form of bluffing, betting, calling, checking, etc.
There is one factor that is consistent amongst all cards games, and that is that luck will always be a factor. I don't care if it's Pokémon, yugioh, magic, whatever. There will always be a "perfect" opening hand and curve that's possible, and with that there is a form of RNG in them all.
The bottom line is if you can't get over the fact that you will lose to luck from time to time, card games aren't your type of game.
And I would like to expand even further to the point that you can find luck in almost any game there is in some form or another. For example look at most mmos. Even having a crit chance or a proc chance is a form of luck. You can have a 20% crit chance, but might get lucky enough to get 3-4 crits back to back that resulted in a kill that otherwise wouldn't. Or an ability that had a 5-10% to proc something and it happens say 3 times in a row.
Even video games that don't have these things, but have lots of different characters thus different matchups is a form of luck. Someone might get top 4 in a tournament because they got a very lucky matchup roll.
The only types of games completely devoid of all luck are games like Rocket League or CS-GO where every single player is given 100% identical means and must perform their best to succeed with said means. Completely even, no different abilities or random factors, just raw skill.
MTG Mana floods?
Happens in all games really. Top decking is luck too. I agree with whoever pointed that you can minimize the luck factor by mulliganing, knowing the outs and to some degree counting the odds.
Even Ben Brode has stated earlier as he was part of the team that the chance of getting a counter raises with each win from you. If lets say a specific deck is statisticly better then yours (a counter) you will get matched against these decks more frequently. Chances raise with each win. Once you have a achieves a unlikely high winrate over the course of many games you will notice that the search-time will majorly raise usualy.
And iam 100% (!!!!) sure that they also do it on the rng in some way - thats what makes me quit over and over again. Tell me its conspiracy or somewhat but i've so much data from my deck tracker collected over the last couple of years. Its nowhere close to a real randomness; more likely algorythm that favours or not.
However; its a fun game if you dont take it serious. It nowhere close to be a competitve card game. Just watch Masterships or somewhat. Basicly just RNG kicks in, thats it.
Luck is important in single games but its power diminishes greatly if you play multiple games in a row.
That's why tournaments should always be Bo5 or even Bo7. Best of three is not enough to diminish the luck factor.
Most card and dice games involve luck though. Even if it's just down to drawing, you can play poker very well and lose due to it being put of your control. HS has more variables but you can't put that down to everything. It isn't all bad luck, there's a reason you're at such a low rank and other people consistently hit legend. Some people can't get past rank 15, others 10, others are good enough to get to 5 but never legend. People tend to hover around their skill level and it isn't just down to luck whether good or bad.
It's also responsible for a lot of the fun in the game. Cards like Yogg's puzzle box and Brawl only exist because rng exists. Others, like Zuljin, animal companion and the lich king can all throw up results that can swing the game either way and they're very common to see. There are loads of other examples but this game only exists really because degrees of rng are in so many different places within the game that it keeps it unpredictable and varied.
Damn, dude... You know, it is very easy for anyone out there from behind a keyboard to try to incriminate a company as popular and important as Blizzard with absurd charges and accuse them of dishonesty with their customers. If you're going to do such a despicable thing, you should back up your claims with irrefutable evidence and SHOW IT, or just don't say anything at all.
It's 90 % luck, 1 % skill
9 % percent concentrated power of will
10% pleasure, 90% pain
And a 100% reason to delete the game!
It's from a old comment of mine, sometimes even i am surprised by own genius! :P
How much luck is involved entirely depends on your deck. Me personally I try to limit RNG as much as possible which is why I run pyroblast instead of yogg box. In my main deck the only real RNG card I run is DQ Alexstrasza. It doesn’t really matter what effects you get from her most of the time she just puts a lot of stats on the board. Beyond that I run a few discover mechanics for flexibility and to give my self a choice rather than blind RNG. Relying too much on RNG can leave games out of your hands which is why I don’t like it. I’m already at the mercy of draw luck, I don’t need other ways for the game to bone me.
On the flip side I hate losing to RNG decks who just happen to RNG the right cards to win rather than having an actual game plan, but shit happens.
It’s a hard thing to prove. He could have tons of data and still you’d call BS because it isn’t explicitly stated. Personally I’ve noticed that after a win streak my mulligans get worse. I imagine it wouldn’t be hard to add a weight factor to mana costs relevant to wins. Whether or not this is the case is anyone’s guess. I can’t deny that it’s odd that when my win rate is around 50-60 % my mulligans are relatively not bad. But if I cross over and start pushing a 70% win rate suddenly my low cost cards are nowhere to be found. If there is some kind of inherent balancing system my guess is that would be it. Much easier to implement than trying to force a counter deck in your face which requires more involved deck analysis within the matchmaking system. Logically it would also make sense to have some kind of shadow code for this from a game standpoint. This can limit the amount of balancing required by keeping win rates manageable as well as help all decks perform in a more streamlined fashion. I’d love to see someone actually run a large test and see what kind of odds they get with their opening hands and then correlate that with wins.
You're totally wrong. I wouldn't instantly call BS if he showed tons of data. Why would I? I don't give a single f...k about being right or wrong here, not even in real life, I just wanna know the truth, and if someone starts making silly statements about something, he or she should at least show some evidence to back up them, don't you think so?
And are you serious??? Hearthstone is almost six years old and extremely popular, do you really think no one tried to run a large test about this??? C'mon dude, give me a break and stop being so naive.
Jesus... -.-
RnG kills playing skills, welcome to the dark side, enjoy while you can.
Dead but dreaming
Show some evidence
very little in the long run, but too much in the short run.
I could change the world, but it is not open sourced.
There is no luck.Everthing is rigged either for you to win or for you to lose.If you are to win each draw or discover or random effect will be the best possible for the situation and if not the opposite.
RNG haters like to say this a lot, and it's the main fallacy of their viewpoint.
(I take it that "coin flip" here means "a single instance of a randomized effect" and not the actual who-goes-first coin flip.)
Even when it seems like an entire game was decided by one crazy event, that's not really the whole picture. It is the culmination of dozens of other events and hundreds of other decisions that followed those events. To get to that point in the game where the outcome could seemingly hinge on random chance took plenty of skill, as did knowing when to trigger that random effect.
So instead of saying, "That person got lucky," it would be more accurate to say, "That person skillfully navigated the game to a place where a difficult position could be turned around with a favorable result from a random effect." A less skillful player would be unlikely to even get to that point.
"Why, you never expected justice from a company, did you? They have neither a soul to lose nor a body to kick." -- Lady Saba Holland
Yugioh is absolute garbage at competitive levels in the opposite direction though, where you can shitcycle through 30 cards and get an invincible board in the first turn.
Don't know about pokemon but since they just recently banned a card before it even came out in the US due to it enabling a consistent hand control build that literally burns your opponents whole hand and stops your opponent from drawing anything, I'm pretty sure it's just as bad.
High level hearthstone involves a lot of risk mitigation and playing around possible outcomes. There is RNG, but the point is to make it work for you, not against
Luck is huge, it allows bad players wins. However, a good player will still consistently win more and climb, and still get luck as well.
It's tilting to lose to topdecks, RNG, RNG topdeck crazy 1/1m bs. But that's HS.
For example I lost today to a highlander rogue (notoriously prone to bad draw) who topdecked zilliax, only lethal out. Gets dragon lacky next turn into Alleistraza, into double taunt, into topdeck natural Allie, T9/10/11. Sometimes you're just going to be SOL.
LOL, now is it me the one who should show some evidence??? Hilarious, you have to be kidding... I'm not the one who started this shit, dude.
Luck is very important. Many decks have polarized match-ups - you need luck to avoid decks you're weak against. Then there are decks that will just kill you with random cards they get, and you have no option to answer them. You need to avoid such situations with luck as well.