As a poker player I understand perception bias. I also have a basic understanding of statistics.
Knowing that they can, I have a hard time trusting that they never influence RNG without full disclosure to us.
I would appreciate a clear statement from the Devs as to any case of manipulated RNG from cards or a statement that it never occurs.
I appreciate that you're not approaching this from a completely tinfoil hat perspective.
But I have to ask, what would be the purpose of manipulating RNG?
Who benefits if RNG is manipulated? Who loses? Why is one person being picked to win over another, because someone is always winning at the expense of someone else? Is any of this worth the effort of manipulating hundreds of thousands of games per day? Is any of it worth completely tanking the competitive integrity of a product they have invested hundreds of millions of dollars in?
Conspiracy theories always sound intriguing until you start asking these types of questions. Then you realize, they're largely impractical and don't hold water.
As a poker player I understand perception bias. I also have a basic understanding of statistics.
Knowing that they can, I have a hard time trusting that they never influence RNG without full disclosure to us.
I would appreciate a clear statement from the Devs as to any case of manipulated RNG from cards or a statement that it never occurs.
I appreciate that you're not approaching this from a completely tinfoil hat perspective.
But I have to ask, what would be the purpose of manipulating RNG?
Who benefits if RNG is manipulated? Who loses? Why is one person being picked to win over another, because someone is always winning at the expense of someone else? Is any of this worth the effort of manipulating hundreds of thousands of games per day? Is any of it worth completely tanking the competitive integrity of a product they have invested hundreds of millions of dollars in?
Conspiracy theories always sound intriguing until you start asking these types of questions. Then you realize, they're largely impractical and don't hold water.
It is called player engagement. Algorithims are developed to keep the maximum amount of players playing. Frustration plateaus are built in to inspire spending. If you do research into the term player engagement in F2P games, you will see that a ton of differing strategies are used with one goal in mind, keep as many players playing as possible and get them to spend as much as possible.
Activision has actually patented methods to influence matchmaking https://www.pcgamer.com/activision-wins-patent-that-uses-matchmaking-to-make-you-want-to-buy-stuff/ . Have you ever noticed that if there is a popular deck out there with some legendaries out there that you don't have that you will frequently que into that deck and he will get a nuts draw and curbstomp you? That is the type of thing that this patent refers to.
You will notice that the shills on this site will never outright deny this stuff is going on. They will bring up perception bias, call you a conspiracy theorist or demand proof. The reality is it is foolish to believe that there is any randomness in hearthstone, and once you know what is going on, you can game the system to reach the goal you have in mind.
This is a long video from 2012 that goes deeply into the hows and why's blizzard manipulated matchmaking in starcraft. Long story short, player engagement. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y4TjH2SdDOQ
As a poker player I understand perception bias. I also have a basic understanding of statistics.
Knowing that they can, I have a hard time trusting that they never influence RNG without full disclosure to us.
I would appreciate a clear statement from the Devs as to any case of manipulated RNG from cards or a statement that it never occurs.
I appreciate that you're not approaching this from a completely tinfoil hat perspective.
But I have to ask, what would be the purpose of manipulating RNG?
Who benefits if RNG is manipulated? Who loses? Why is one person being picked to win over another, because someone is always winning at the expense of someone else? Is any of this worth the effort of manipulating hundreds of thousands of games per day? Is any of it worth completely tanking the competitive integrity of a product they have invested hundreds of millions of dollars in?
Conspiracy theories always sound intriguing until you start asking these types of questions. Then you realize, they're largely impractical and don't hold water.
It is called player engagement. Algorithims are developed to keep the maximum amount of players playing. Frustration plateaus are built in to inspire spending. If you do research into the term player engagement in F2P games, you will see that a ton of differing strategies are used with one goal in mind, keep as many players playing as possible and get them to spend as much as possible.
Activision has actually patented methods to influence matchmaking https://www.pcgamer.com/activision-wins-patent-that-uses-matchmaking-to-make-you-want-to-buy-stuff/ . Have you ever noticed that if there is a popular deck out there with some legendaries out there that you don't have that you will frequently que into that deck and he will get a nuts draw and curbstomp you? That is the type of thing that this patent refers to.
You will notice that the shills on this site will never outright deny this stuff is going on. They will bring up perception bias, call you a conspiracy theorist or demand proof. The reality is it is foolish to believe that there is any randomness in hearthstone, and once you know what is going on, you can game the system to reach the goal you have in mind.
This is a long video from 2012 that goes deeply into the hows and why's blizzard manipulated matchmaking in starcraft. Long story short, player engagement. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y4TjH2SdDOQ
Well name calling people who wants proofs before the make a claim is not helping your case. I don't know where you are from, but where I come from you are innocent till proven guilty, and the fact is neither you nor anyone else has come up with any proofs. And don't say you have experienced it multiple times, because you should know that is not real proof.
Actually we are many who would like to know if the randomness is biased. That could help us in decision making, and how likely you are to draw card x. But no one has proven anything, and for a game of this size and age that will more likely mean they don't change the RNG depending on you win streak. But if you prove it or see anyone proving it be sure to hit me up
It’s difficult to prove but sometimes I feel as if certain cards are skewed to produce certain options more often than others.
Priest Galakrond almost always generates the same 3-4 minions more often in both wild and standard. I’ve had it played against me, I’ve played it, and spectated enough games to see it on my friends too.
Back when unstable portal decks was a tavern brawl, I was so sure that Blizzard has changed the odds to produce crazy options more often. I saw Deathwing so much
Yes, it is manipulated, 100%. Every game I have ever lost in hearthstone was the dev's fcking with me. I am a the fcking GOAT at this game, it makes no sense I would lose, especially when I have actually spent money. Anyone who disagrees has sided themselves with the devs and need to be exposed.
Any claim made without any evidence does not need to be disapproved, as logic states. So as long the claimant doesn't reinforce his argument, it should be dismissed immediately. And it doesn't take a genius to realise that no argument can be put forth here without a dev, literally coming out and saying that they are rigging rng.
What? Pirate warrior was heavy RNG and it was all based on mulligan. It a deck that liked to kill you around turn 5...if it went to turn 8+ it was likely to lose. So they consistantly played with only a thirds of their deck and ran virtually no card draw...that is RNG.
They have fucked up RNG on three occasions and people have found out in a matter of days, even when those cards were barely played. Do you think people wouldn't find out if they heavily manipulated RNG?
Perfect thread, salt thread would have been good, too.
Third arena game in a very short time lost because of RNG generated Dragonqueen Alexstrasza. The more I play this game the more cannot believe this game is not manipulated in any form.
And you just should keep in mind, Activision has patents for rigged matchmaking etc. As if they are not using it. Believing it would be naive as fuck.
The idea of the devs manipulating randomness is nothing more than confirmation bias by those who post it. The negative instances of RNG not tilting in their favor stick out in their mind more than the times where it did.
The only card where I put my tinfoil hat on and subscribe to this conspiracy is with Convincing Infiltrator. You gotta try hard to convince me that thing doesn't automatically target your highest value card. I don't even get mad anymore because I automatically assume there is a 70-80% chance it is taking out my best minion regardless of how filled my board is.
If you took the time to actually find and read those patents you would have known how that matchmaking works and why it has nothing to do with RNG manipulation in HS.
If you took the time to actually find and read those patents you would have known how that matchmaking works and why it has nothing to do with RNG manipulation in HS.
It is called player engagement. Algorithims are developed to keep the maximum amount of players playing. Frustration plateaus are built in to inspire spending. If you do research into the term player engagement in F2P games, you will see that a ton of differing strategies are used with one goal in mind, keep as many players playing as possible and get them to spend as much as possible.
Activision has actually patented methods to influence matchmaking https://www.pcgamer.com/activision-wins-patent-that-uses-matchmaking-to-make-you-want-to-buy-stuff/ . Have you ever noticed that if there is a popular deck out there with some legendaries out there that you don't have that you will frequently que into that deck and he will get a nuts draw and curbstomp you? That is the type of thing that this patent refers to.
You will notice that the shills on this site will never outright deny this stuff is going on. They will bring up perception bias, call you a conspiracy theorist or demand proof. The reality is it is foolish to believe that there is any randomness in hearthstone, and once you know what is going on, you can game the system to reach the goal you have in mind.
This is a long video from 2012 that goes deeply into the hows and why's blizzard manipulated matchmaking in starcraft. Long story short, player engagement. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y4TjH2SdDOQ
Matchmaking isn't in game RNG. You're talking about something different than what this topic is about.
If you took the time to actually find and read those patents you would have known how that matchmaking works and why it has nothing to do with RNG manipulation in HS.
He was making a joke.
Then it is my bad but you can understand how difficult it can be to separate drooling idiocy from jokes when it comes to the topic of RNG manipulation :)
Edit #2: This is taken from an article on HearthstoneTopDecks. I'm not sure why it was SOOOOO hard to find this information and that so many people were unaware of this change. Here is the gist of the article.
"Let’s talk quickly about what exactly changes. Before this patch, each Discover card that could give you cards from pool of both Neutral and Class cards (so a bunch of them) gave you the latter more commonly. To be precise, each Class card had a 400% chance to appear compared to a Neutral card. After the patch, this bonus will no longer be present. It means that every single card has exactly the same chance of being Discovered.
Can you give a link to this article you found? And was this change specifically for Delivery Drone, or was it for the Discover mechanic itself?
And if anyone here thinks card draw itself uses a heavy algorithm to decide what card to give you; play the same deck for 50 or 100 games in a row. In every game, for every single normal card draw, make a note of what it was. Make an excel spreadsheet with row 1 being each card in your deck, each row being 1 game, and each cell being which card draw it was. Once you've played some dozen games, make a graph out of this data. If it looks significantly different from expected, you might be on to something. If not, let us know for science that you do not reject the null hypothesis.
They told us that Zephrys, even including only basic and classic cards, was very difficult and took a very long time to code, and it doesn't even know what most cards do; if it's on the board, all it does is make an estimate of how good its effect is based on the difference between stats and mana cost. And it doesn't know what cards you have in your hand, or what your opponent has. You think they would program card draw itself to know exactly how good every single card in the game is in every single situation, and then decide how much it wants you to win? That would be far, far too much effort. Many AIs in solo adventures fail to understand cards that they should know, and play like idiots. If HS can't even program their AIs to be good without giving them objectively OP cards, what makes you think they'll change RNG in-game?
What? Pirate warrior was heavy RNG and it was all based on mulligan. It a deck that liked to kill you around turn 5...if it went to turn 8+ it was likely to lose. So they consistantly played with only a thirds of their deck and ran virtually no card draw...that is RNG.
No that is not rng every deck have a mulligan consistency if every deck has that that means it is not based on rng like highlander decks you can easily backward curve until turn 5 and get fucked without any chance to win yet pirate warrior was highly consistent and didn't depend on rng at all. pirate warrior era was the same era when warlock had bunch of discard cards. I created a deck with warlock even faster and stronger than the pirate warrior yet it was dependent on rng if I get good rng with discard mechanic I was winning at turn 4 against pirate warrior if I didn't I was loosing at turn 5 but it never changed I always lost at turn 5 against pirate warrior with that deck. I was playing with that deck because it was fun to annoy pirate warriors with a faster deck.
So the question made is far to general. Do they manipulate randomness? Yes, they have already admitted to doing so with cards like Dr. Boom, Mad Genius. They will add weights to certain card "types" the same as they said they changed certain probabilities for getting certain Arena cards.
In what way was Boom manipulated? I haven't heard of this before.
They had different weights for generating class Mechs vs. non-class Mechs. They openly stated that after they changed the weights to equal out the chance of getting class Mechs. They also lowered probabilities of getting certain OP cards in Arena.
Edit: these were the Delivery Drone hero power discovers.
Edit #2: This is taken from an article on HearthstoneTopDecks. I'm not sure why it was SOOOOO hard to find this information and that so many people were unaware of this change. Here is the gist of the article.
"Let’s talk quickly about what exactly changes. Before this patch, each Discover card that could give you cards from pool of both Neutral and Class cards (so a bunch of them) gave you the latter more commonly. To be precise, each Class card had a 400% chance to appear compared to a Neutral card. After the patch, this bonus will no longer be present. It means that every single card has exactly the same chance of being Discovered.
It doesn’t means that Class cards will have exactly 4x lower chance to appear right now than they did in the past. Depending on the exact card pool etc. they will now, on average, appear ~2.5 times less often. Which is still a lot.
But why does it matter, exactly? Why is it a nerf? That’s because, on average, class cards are more powerful than neutral cards. There are less “filler” class cards than neutrals. There are also much more specific, high priority picks among class cards. Getting them way less consistently will be a huge downside. The cards that could previously give you either a class or neutral card will now offer neutral cards more often. Which, most of the time, is bad. But we’ve also got two examples of cards that will become stronger after the changes!"
Oh, you were referring to the old Discover rule. The question is: Is it RNG manipulation or a mechanic that Discover cards used to favour class cards? I mean, it wasn't hidden information, everyone knew it. That's what made Stonehill Defender so good in Paladin. Removing the class bonus actually made Discover cards even more RNG heavy.
Isn't what we're discussing here whether Blizzard is manipulating RNG in secret?
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
I appreciate that you're not approaching this from a completely tinfoil hat perspective.
But I have to ask, what would be the purpose of manipulating RNG?
Who benefits if RNG is manipulated? Who loses? Why is one person being picked to win over another, because someone is always winning at the expense of someone else? Is any of this worth the effort of manipulating hundreds of thousands of games per day? Is any of it worth completely tanking the competitive integrity of a product they have invested hundreds of millions of dollars in?
Conspiracy theories always sound intriguing until you start asking these types of questions. Then you realize, they're largely impractical and don't hold water.
I play 3 different decks and always face counter for my.Idk maybe I am just unlucky,but it is weird.
It is called player engagement. Algorithims are developed to keep the maximum amount of players playing. Frustration plateaus are built in to inspire spending. If you do research into the term player engagement in F2P games, you will see that a ton of differing strategies are used with one goal in mind, keep as many players playing as possible and get them to spend as much as possible.
Activision has actually patented methods to influence matchmaking https://www.pcgamer.com/activision-wins-patent-that-uses-matchmaking-to-make-you-want-to-buy-stuff/ . Have you ever noticed that if there is a popular deck out there with some legendaries out there that you don't have that you will frequently que into that deck and he will get a nuts draw and curbstomp you? That is the type of thing that this patent refers to.
This is a 10 minute video that pretty much sums up what most games are up to these days. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E_QaTtvI2tg
You will notice that the shills on this site will never outright deny this stuff is going on. They will bring up perception bias, call you a conspiracy theorist or demand proof. The reality is it is foolish to believe that there is any randomness in hearthstone, and once you know what is going on, you can game the system to reach the goal you have in mind.
This is a long video from 2012 that goes deeply into the hows and why's blizzard manipulated matchmaking in starcraft. Long story short, player engagement. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y4TjH2SdDOQ
Well name calling people who wants proofs before the make a claim is not helping your case. I don't know where you are from, but where I come from you are innocent till proven guilty, and the fact is neither you nor anyone else has come up with any proofs. And don't say you have experienced it multiple times, because you should know that is not real proof.
Actually we are many who would like to know if the randomness is biased. That could help us in decision making, and how likely you are to draw card x. But no one has proven anything, and for a game of this size and age that will more likely mean they don't change the RNG depending on you win streak. But if you prove it or see anyone proving it be sure to hit me up
Silver Hand Recruit
It’s difficult to prove but sometimes I feel as if certain cards are skewed to produce certain options more often than others.
Priest Galakrond almost always generates the same 3-4 minions more often in both wild and standard. I’ve had it played against me, I’ve played it, and spectated enough games to see it on my friends too.
Back when unstable portal decks was a tavern brawl, I was so sure that Blizzard has changed the odds to produce crazy options more often. I saw Deathwing so much
Aha, I thought I was the only one suspect this!
After you fought against a tons of DH, you changed to a counter DH deck, and you cannot see them any more, wierd !!
Yes, it is manipulated, 100%. Every game I have ever lost in hearthstone was the dev's fcking with me. I am a the fcking GOAT at this game, it makes no sense I would lose, especially when I have actually spent money. Anyone who disagrees has sided themselves with the devs and need to be exposed.
Any claim made without any evidence does not need to be disapproved, as logic states. So as long the claimant doesn't reinforce his argument, it should be dismissed immediately. And it doesn't take a genius to realise that no argument can be put forth here without a dev, literally coming out and saying that they are rigging rng.
What? Pirate warrior was heavy RNG and it was all based on mulligan. It a deck that liked to kill you around turn 5...if it went to turn 8+ it was likely to lose. So they consistantly played with only a thirds of their deck and ran virtually no card draw...that is RNG.
They have fucked up RNG on three occasions and people have found out in a matter of days, even when those cards were barely played. Do you think people wouldn't find out if they heavily manipulated RNG?
It is manipulated 100%, if you like it or not.
Perfect thread, salt thread would have been good, too.
Third arena game in a very short time lost because of RNG generated Dragonqueen Alexstrasza.
The more I play this game the more cannot believe this game is not manipulated in any form.
And you just should keep in mind, Activision has patents for rigged matchmaking etc. As if they are not using it. Believing it would be naive as fuck.
The idea of the devs manipulating randomness is nothing more than confirmation bias by those who post it. The negative instances of RNG not tilting in their favor stick out in their mind more than the times where it did.
The only card where I put my tinfoil hat on and subscribe to this conspiracy is with Convincing Infiltrator. You gotta try hard to convince me that thing doesn't automatically target your highest value card. I don't even get mad anymore because I automatically assume there is a 70-80% chance it is taking out my best minion regardless of how filled my board is.
If you took the time to actually find and read those patents you would have known how that matchmaking works and why it has nothing to do with RNG manipulation in HS.
He was making a joke.
Matchmaking isn't in game RNG.
You're talking about something different than what this topic is about.
Then it is my bad but you can understand how difficult it can be to separate drooling idiocy from jokes when it comes to the topic of RNG manipulation :)
Can you give a link to this article you found? And was this change specifically for Delivery Drone, or was it for the Discover mechanic itself?
And if anyone here thinks card draw itself uses a heavy algorithm to decide what card to give you; play the same deck for 50 or 100 games in a row. In every game, for every single normal card draw, make a note of what it was. Make an excel spreadsheet with row 1 being each card in your deck, each row being 1 game, and each cell being which card draw it was. Once you've played some dozen games, make a graph out of this data. If it looks significantly different from expected, you might be on to something. If not, let us know for science that you do not reject the null hypothesis.
They told us that Zephrys, even including only basic and classic cards, was very difficult and took a very long time to code, and it doesn't even know what most cards do; if it's on the board, all it does is make an estimate of how good its effect is based on the difference between stats and mana cost. And it doesn't know what cards you have in your hand, or what your opponent has. You think they would program card draw itself to know exactly how good every single card in the game is in every single situation, and then decide how much it wants you to win? That would be far, far too much effort. Many AIs in solo adventures fail to understand cards that they should know, and play like idiots. If HS can't even program their AIs to be good without giving them objectively OP cards, what makes you think they'll change RNG in-game?
No that is not rng every deck have a mulligan consistency if every deck has that that means it is not based on rng like highlander decks you can easily backward curve until turn 5 and get fucked without any chance to win yet pirate warrior was highly consistent and didn't depend on rng at all. pirate warrior era was the same era when warlock had bunch of discard cards. I created a deck with warlock even faster and stronger than the pirate warrior yet it was dependent on rng if I get good rng with discard mechanic I was winning at turn 4 against pirate warrior if I didn't I was loosing at turn 5 but it never changed I always lost at turn 5 against pirate warrior with that deck. I was playing with that deck because it was fun to annoy pirate warriors with a faster deck.
Oh, you were referring to the old Discover rule. The question is: Is it RNG manipulation or a mechanic that Discover cards used to favour class cards? I mean, it wasn't hidden information, everyone knew it. That's what made Stonehill Defender so good in Paladin. Removing the class bonus actually made Discover cards even more RNG heavy.
Isn't what we're discussing here whether Blizzard is manipulating RNG in secret?