Hearthpwn

Nobody claims that match making is completely random. It's also not solely based on rank. It's based on a score based on recent win rate, combined with rank and probably total time played. Nobody here is denying that either. 25 games with the majority being against priest? Sounds unlikely. Less likely than facing no priests in 20 games, which isn't even 1 game per popular archetype. If you roll a die 3 times, why would you HAVE to roll a 6? 

There is even a totally public fact about match making, that can explain why you don't face the deck you keep losing to: Your MMR dropped so far that you are facing shitty players. Do you expect miracle priest, a deck that's overall rare on ladder but popular among top legend competitive players, to be a common sight? Are you in top legend? Because that's the only place where you have a chance greater than 1/20 to face that deck...

Quote from MrDread >>

Quote from MyDude33 >>

Quote from MrDread >>

Quote from MyDude33 >>

Quote from MrDread >>

Quote from MyDude33 >>

Quote from MrDread >>

Quote from MyDude33 >>

Quote from MrDread >>

Still not a single priest since I teched silence and my first post is three pages back and I've played many games since.

Matchmaking is totally legit.

 

 Hoy shit! It's so obvious! I wonder why every other player or data tracker doesn't see something this obvious. A mystery it must be.

 I'm not the only one and your obtuseness is obvious.

 There is also more than one person who is convinced the earth is flat, believes in chem trails, bigfoot, etc. They all use the same argument you do and are also narcissists.

Fact of the matter is most people are just really bad at understanding things with a large amount of variables and in large numbers along with a limited understanding of probability and statistics. The amount of games being played per hour is already enormous. Then add in that not every one has the same cards so they don't play the same decks. They also have don't make the same decisions or see the same deck order. Then add in that the meta changes based on rank and that people are constantly adjusting to the meta. Unfortunately, you and you're matches just aren't the center of the universe. It's an aggregate of all the players. Get over it bro.

 Oh gee now I'm a narcissist.

I've been playing the game for seven years. Matchmaking is not random. 

And you mean "your", bro.

 I've been playing since open beta homie. What's your point?

Try making a real argument instead of just brushing things off. You just don't understand statistics, probability, and don't see how many variables are involved. Just like every other conspiracy theorist who treats real data as fake or made up by evil greedy people.

And yes you are a narcissist. You have the audacity to think that your particular tiny data set means something and that you in particular have seen through everything and have seen what others cannot. This would include large data tracking sites.

Thanks for the grammar correction though. My quality of life just went up because of it.

I played 20-25 games in Standard. The majority of them were Priest.

I tech silence.

Since then I have not seen a single Priest and it's been another 20 or so games.

Plenty of people have experienced this exact same thing throughout the years. 

But you keep rambling on about statistics and variables because you need to make yourself sound smarter than you actually are.

On top of learning the difference between "you're" and "your", you should also learn the definition of narcissist. 

 

 Maybe you should learn about statistics and probability like I said. Then you'll actually have perspective. Holy shit 20 games who cares? There's probably at least 200,000 games being played at any given moment that will show that your experience is just a tiny outlier. I've seen crazier shit dude. You're conflating a tiny local occurrence and saying that represents the whole because a couple other random people on this site (which represents the tiniest of fractions of players) said so too (with no proof). That's a huge logical fallacy.

If your only argument is my grammar at this point, then you can have that one. I'll happily give it to you if it makes you feel like you got me on something so you can save face with people you don't even know lol.

 Maybe I just know what the fuck random is and guess what, the matchmaking isn't it.

So 20 games isn't enough for you? What do you think happened when I took the silence out? What was the very first class I ran into? I'll let you guess.

 No, you don't understand much from what I can tell. But that's cool. You do you. I'm just glad I don't have to live your life. What a miserable experience that would be.

Quote from MrDread >>

Quote from MyDude33 >>

Quote from MrDread >>

Quote from MyDude33 >>

Quote from MrDread >>

Quote from MyDude33 >>

Quote from MrDread >>

Quote from MyDude33 >>

Quote from MrDread >>

Quote from MyDude33 >>

Quote from MrDread >>

Still not a single priest since I teched silence and my first post is three pages back and I've played many games since.

Matchmaking is totally legit.

 

 Hoy shit! It's so obvious! I wonder why every other player or data tracker doesn't see something this obvious. A mystery it must be.

 I'm not the only one and your obtuseness is obvious.

 There is also more than one person who is convinced the earth is flat, believes in chem trails, bigfoot, etc. They all use the same argument you do and are also narcissists.

Fact of the matter is most people are just really bad at understanding things with a large amount of variables and in large numbers along with a limited understanding of probability and statistics. The amount of games being played per hour is already enormous. Then add in that not every one has the same cards so they don't play the same decks. They also have don't make the same decisions or see the same deck order. Then add in that the meta changes based on rank and that people are constantly adjusting to the meta. Unfortunately, you and you're matches just aren't the center of the universe. It's an aggregate of all the players. Get over it bro.

 Oh gee now I'm a narcissist.

I've been playing the game for seven years. Matchmaking is not random. 

And you mean "your", bro.

 I've been playing since open beta homie. What's your point?

Try making a real argument instead of just brushing things off. You just don't understand statistics, probability, and don't see how many variables are involved. Just like every other conspiracy theorist who treats real data as fake or made up by evil greedy people.

And yes you are a narcissist. You have the audacity to think that your particular tiny data set means something and that you in particular have seen through everything and have seen what others cannot. This would include large data tracking sites.

Thanks for the grammar correction though. My quality of life just went up because of it.

I played 20-25 games in Standard. The majority of them were Priest.

I tech silence.

Since then I have not seen a single Priest and it's been another 20 or so games.

Plenty of people have experienced this exact same thing throughout the years. 

But you keep rambling on about statistics and variables because you need to make yourself sound smarter than you actually are.

On top of learning the difference between "you're" and "your", you should also learn the definition of narcissist. 

 

 Maybe you should learn about statistics and probability like I said. Then you'll actually have perspective. Holy shit 20 games who cares? There's probably at least 200,000 games being played at any given moment that will show that your experience is just a tiny outlier. I've seen crazier shit dude. You're conflating a tiny local occurrence and saying that represents the whole because a couple other random people on this site (which represents the tiniest of fractions of players) said so too (with no proof). That's a huge logical fallacy.

If your only argument is my grammar at this point, then you can have that one. I'll happily give it to you if it makes you feel like you got me on something so you can save face with people you don't even know lol.

 Maybe I just know what the fuck random is and guess what, the matchmaking isn't it.

So 20 games isn't enough for you? What do you think happened when I took the silence out? What was the very first class I ran into? I'll let you guess.

 No, you don't understand much from what I can tell. But that's cool. You do you. I'm just glad I don't have to live your life. What a miserable experience that would be.

Nice deflection. I'm quite content with my life. I can guarantee you I know much more in that life than you kiddo.

So now please use all of your statistical "knowledge" and explain why I never run into a specific class when I tech silence and then immediately match up with that class when I remove the silence.

Can you take time out from Blizzard's balls smacking against your chin long enough to do that?

 You are running into this highly technically advanced concept called "bad luck", combined with a mixture of "priest isn't actually that played right now", and you're somehow thinking there's a conspiracy? 

Psst, want to know what a tech card against a deck that you consistently encounter is called? A normal fucking card you just put in your deck, because it is consistent in a matchup. 

Quote from ShadowAldrius >>

Quote from fucs >>

You can test it yourself relatively easily. Build a deck of absolutely bad cards, don't use any strategy. Just build a deck yourself. Your next opponent will also play an off-meta deck. Almost always works. It's just an extra screw to bring some "balance" into the game.

 Or it could just be that people who are at a certain MMR... play off meta decks.

 Like i said my friend.. just test it yourself. I have achieved several times legend. Meanwhile, I always end up in diamond* because I just don't have time for the grind. As I said, build a deck without or with only a few keycards and you will see that you can play against such a deck. Doesn't take 10 minutes to prove that.

Blizzard has built an AI to spy your mood from webcam, keyboard, touchscreen and basically everything which relates to you. whenever you win too much they throw a deck archetype counter at you right from the MM. because pissing you off is there main objective, all day, everyday. they mess with your deck, your draws and basically whatever feeds your paranoia. you dont loose because you simply loose, no no. impossibru. you re too good for that. you loose because Blizzard, pink unicorns, invisible cooties and angry gremlins are messing with your astrological karma. that makes perfect sense.

Even motive doesn't make any goddamn sense here. Blizzard literally loses money by doing what you're suggesting they're doing. Creating problems in the game experience without selling you the solution kind of makes the game worse without no way to exploit it to their benefit. If you're gonna create conspiracy theories, at least come up with plausible motive for it. 

---------------------------> the joke

you.

it was sarcasm dude :) ofc it makes no sense.

Quote from Aventurier >>

Blizzard has built an AI to spy your mood from webcam, keyboard, touchscreen and basically everything which relates to you. whenever you win too much they throw a deck archetype counter at you right from the MM. because pissing you off is there main objective, all day, everyday. they mess with your deck, your draws and basically whatever feeds your paranoia. you dont loose because you simply loose, no no. impossibru. you re too good for that. you loose because Blizzard, pink unicorns, invisible cooties and angry gremlins are messing with your astrological karma. that makes perfect sense.

 I like how you spelled everything else perfectly but somehow don't know how to spell "lose", lol. In all seriousness, it would make sense from a business perspective (if they had the capability) for Blizzard to implement a matchmaking system in Hearthstone that ensures that players lose matches at least as frequently as they win them, but this is hardly a topic that hasn't been explored before. How exactly they would do such a thing is a matter of no little debate, but I don't think it's as improbable as "pink unicorns, invisible cooties, and angry gremlins... messing with your astrological karma".

https://youtu.be/FzoXQKumgCw

if you assess that "Blizzard is willing to manipulate your games for making you loose" as probable as "pink unicorns"... then i have sad news for you mate :D

technically its possible. now, does that make sense ? nope

Quote from MrDread >>

Quote from YourPersonalGuru >>

Nobody claims that match making is completely random. It's also not solely based on rank. It's based on a score based on recent win rate, combined with rank and probably total time played. Nobody here is denying that either. 25 games with the majority being against priest? Sounds unlikely. Less likely than facing no priests in 20 games, which isn't even 1 game per popular archetype. If you roll a die 3 times, why would you HAVE to roll a 6? 

There is even a totally public fact about match making, that can explain why you don't face the deck you keep losing to: Your MMR dropped so far that you are facing shitty players. Do you expect miracle priest, a deck that's overall rare on ladder but popular among top legend competitive players, to be a common sight? Are you in top legend? Because that's the only place where you have a chance greater than 1/20 to face that deck...

 Who said I kept losing to it? Yes, 25 games with most being against priest. You heard that right.

 Why would you tech against it then? There are 2-ish priest decks that are at least annoyed by silence and neither are very popular. It's a bit like playing roulette and betting on 1 number that popped up a few times earlier and then expect to earn fortunes...

Actually it would make perfect business sense for Blizzard to manipulate matchmaking in order to ensure that players lose more frequently than they would otherwise due to say, variance. The reasoning is quite logical and is laid out directly in a patent filed by Activision in 2014 (https://patents.google.com/patent/US20160005270). To quote myself from another thread:

"In essence, the premise of the patent as is communicated directly in the abstract is to facilitate players participation in microtransactions via matchmaking. The hypothetical situation in which this might be achieved is related as follows: "...the system may match a more expert/marquee player with a junior player to encourage the junior player to make game-related purchases of items possessed/used by the marquee player. A junior player may wish to emulate the marquee player by obtaining weapons or other items used by the marquee player". This is quite ingenious in that, as you noted, humans generally do not enjoy losing; Blizzard would be able to take maximal advantage of this psychological bias towards winning by artificially producing unfavorable matches and subsequently offering players a means to achieve the same success their opponents had by purchasing card packs (i.e. microtransactions). So you see, if this methodology were actually being implemented in Hearthstones matchmaking algorithm, it is quite clear that ensuring that players win matches would not exactly be Blizzards objective. If anything, it would be quite the opposite." 

So yes, the hypothetical scenario in which such a system might be employed in a game such as HS is decidedly more probable than "pink unicorns".

Quote from Sevasmios >

 I like how you spelled everything else perfectly but somehow don't know how to spell "lose", lol. In all seriousness, it would make sense from a business perspective (if they had the capability) for Blizzard to implement a matchmaking system in Hearthstone that ensures that players lose matches at least as frequently as they win them, but this is hardly a topic that hasn't been explored before. How exactly they would do such a thing is a matter of no little debate, but I don't think it's as improbable as "pink unicorns, invisible cooties, and angry gremlins... messing with your astrological karma".

 

 Now nobody disagrees that match making is partially made for ensuring a more even win/loss rate for people. Because the whole point is to make sure that you feel sufficiently challenged which should mean that you neither win or lose too much. Otherwise you'll be bored and stop playing. Your opponents should be somewhat equal to you or the business will die. The only disagreement is weather your deck list is matched too. I've seen way too many meta decks to believe that. I've farmed enough meta decks to get a 65+% WR and I've seen others do the same. Sure I've also "felt" the opposite. Like I've played backgammon and not rolled a 6 for ages or bet on a number over and over, only to see it after I switch. Try playing some dice games, you'll see crazier shit than in your average yogg-video. If you try to go anti 5% of the meta, you're basically trying to roll a 6 on 50% of your rolls so... Don't do that. 

Quote from YourPersonalGuru >>

Quote from Sevasmios >

 I like how you spelled everything else perfectly but somehow don't know how to spell "lose", lol. In all seriousness, it would make sense from a business perspective (if they had the capability) for Blizzard to implement a matchmaking system in Hearthstone that ensures that players lose matches at least as frequently as they win them, but this is hardly a topic that hasn't been explored before. How exactly they would do such a thing is a matter of no little debate, but I don't think it's as improbable as "pink unicorns, invisible cooties, and angry gremlins... messing with your astrological karma".

 

 Now nobody disagrees that match making is partially made for ensuring a more even win/loss rate for people. Because the whole point is to make sure that you feel sufficiently challenged which should mean that you neither win or lose too much. Otherwise you'll be bored and stop playing. Your opponents should be somewhat equal to you or the business will die. The only disagreement is weather your deck list is matched too. I've seen way too many meta decks to believe that. I've farmed enough meta decks to get a 65+% WR and I've seen others do the same. Sure I've also "felt" the opposite. Like I've played backgammon and not rolled a 6 for ages or bet on a number over and over, only to see it after I switch. Try playing some dice games, you'll see crazier shit than in your average yogg-video. If you try to go anti 5% of the meta, you're basically trying to roll a 6 on 50% of your rolls so... Don't do that. 

 Right, player engagement is certainly a critical component of any popular games' success and would definitely serve as sufficient motivation for matchmaking manipulation on Blizz's end. As for whether decklists are taken into consideration by the matchmaking algorithm, for me it seems a bit gratuitous to argue about bc there is no way for any of us to know one way or another exactly how Blizzard would go about manipulating matchmaking (or if said manipulation is even occurring on a statistically significant level in the first place). To me it seems unlikely that the algorithm would be sophisticated enough to incorporate parameters like deck archetypes, player experience, etc into matchmaking, but I'm hardly an expert on that topic. Particulars are virtually impossible to elucidate in this instance. I think that all that we can say for certain is that it is feasible that Blizzard is actively manipulating matchmaking in HS to some extent, and that said manipulation would be incentivized by potential profit. 

Quote from Sevasmios >>

 To me it seems unlikely that the algorithm would be sophisticated enough to incorporate parameters like deck archetypes, player experience, etc into matchmaking, but I'm hardly an expert on that topic. 

 I very much agree with you here. I wish the people who thought the opposite would discuss like this. In the end none of us knows, but hopefully we're all having fun. 

you base your assumptions on how you perceive other humans (ie purely driven by greed). first it is not the truth, but anyway:

like someone above said, it does not make sense regarding business. if you get detected rigging games, your business is over. not worth the risk. and giving how paranoid every player is here already...

now a developer of a game is mostly driven by the will to give others fun. therefor your theory is lacking motivation to be more probable than pink unicorns.

 The people propagating this conspiracy theory are proving Blizzard's supposed motivation to do this in the first place to be wrong. Clearly, even the impression of this supposed rigging is ruining game experience for you guys, making it an inherently bad business decision to actually do it. Yes, Blizzard will do stuff for the sake of player engagement, but making the game feel worse to play certainly *cannot* fall under that umbrella. 

But just like all the other conspiracy theorists on the web, you guys are so lost in the sauce that these inherently incompatible facts somehow are still used as "evidence".