My conspiracy theory is different. When you are winning a lot during a certain day dont stop. Ive done this mistake several times. "Im like ok it's been a good day, tomorrow i'll continue my climb" but o keep facing counters to my deck and go down.
If u wanna hit legend and u are like rank 3 and above and u are on a roll dont stop until u hit legend. If u leave the rest for the next day u will lose all progress. It has happened to me on the past few days with 2 different accounts. Its probably due to mini pocket metas depending on day of play so my advice is dont stop until u reach legend
My conspiracy theory is different. When you are winning a lot during a certain day dont stop. Ive done this mistake several times. "Im like ok it's been a good day, tomorrow i'll continue my climb" but o keep facing counters to my deck and go down.
If u wanna hit legend and u are like rank 3 and above and u are on a roll dont stop until u hit legend. If u leave the rest for the next day u will lose all progress. It has happened to me on the past few days with 2 different accounts. Its probably due to mini pocket metas depending on day of play so my advice is dont stop until u reach legend
that's exactly my experience. one day i win almost every match, easy and without a sweat. the next day with the exact same deck i'll lose every single match
Rogue is one of the most popular classes of the game, among the most powerful decks in the meta, and you, playing an archetype that is unfavoured against that class (even homebrewed) and after losing to a lot of said popular and powerful deck, claims it's because there's a conspiracy against you? Please.
Lol it sucks because at legend time to time it matches me against diamond 10 and platinum players each time I am like wtf poor guy was probably on winstrike. They don't even show opponents rank if you are not legend anymore.
Something no one ever answers when it comes to this sort of thing is how do they know what type of decks are being played?
Are you seriously suggesting that it scans both decks during the match making process, hecks the cards, assigns an archetype and then puts it against a strong ir weak archetype that has also been scanned?
No class simply counters another all the time. If you get put against some janky rogue deck then it's no longer a counter. If you have warrior for example, if a counter to enrage warrior is say, control priest then it needs to know its putting aggro vs control for example. If you're playing a control style warrior then the counter is no longer effective so it can't pair those two together because control warrior may absolutely dominate control priest (just examples not suggestions on actual counters in a current meta).
If it simply assigns classes then do they maintain this constantly? Then blindly put rogue vs priest, hunter vs mate etc etc depending on the meta? A counter now may not be a counter by the time an expansion launches and changes the meta.
Then I see this said in other games and I've never seen any evidence for it. The evidence points more towards players having difficulty accepting bad luck or lack of skill and instead they blame the developers rigging the game and ait firmly in denial.
Fifa players do the exact same thing. Go on their forums and you'll see complaints about people losing only because each are rigging the match making.
It's all bullshit in my opinion. Players can't accept losing and blame anything but themselves, this is really common behaviour and so either a number of separate developers are doing this and its never been proven or players are just salty about losing and I know which I would put my money on.
Come with some actual evidence, some coding algorithm or confirmation from someone who works on the game, anything, then we can discuss it. It's all just bad losers and confirmation bias though. Youd be talking about a really crazy match making system that can put the right type of rogue against the right type of priest and one would have to be on a good streak and the other on a bad streak. If both are on good streak then why would they boost the streak of one and not the other? That doesn't fit the conspiracy narrative at all. And what you're saying is the system has managed to do this for 6 games in a row?
Come onnnnn......if I could be bothered then there are several other points which debunk this but I'm assuming anyone who believes this won't read this post or respond to it at least so there's no point. It's very difficult to reason with someone who is being irrational about something and in my experience that's exactly what computer gamer players are about things like this, irrational.
I'd like an answer on how it assigns archetypes though and makes sure that rather than blindly put rogue v priest, it puts x type of rogue vs x type of priest, to ensure it actually rings the match in one players favour.
If HL Priest is the most popular deck on day 1, day 2 will be full of HL Hunter.... on day 3 everyone will be playing Murloc Paladin to counter the Hunter... On day 4, everyone will be playing Enrage Warrior to counter the Hunter. On day 5 everyone will be back to Priest to counter the Warrior...
That is how a meta works.
This is how the people work:
Lets use a Priest player starting on meta day 3 for this example...
Day 3, they're killing Murloc Pally... They're the best...
Day 4: Crushing some Warriors... OMG how am I not in the grandmasters tour?!?
Day 1: Hmmm, lots of mirror matches... That's okay, I'm 50/50 today, but after the last 2 days I'm still at like a 65-70% winrate! So I RULE!
Day 2: WTF?!? (heads to message boards), "Blizzard is so f@#* rigged!!! I am a really good player! I was CRUSHING it for 3 straight days, and now I can't BUY a win!!! Blizzard is ONLY matching me against my worst matchup!! I HATE THIS NEW MMR SYSTEM!!!!!"
You don't hate the MMR system.. You hate shifting metas... If you keep playing Priest after day 1, you're OBVIOUSLY going to meet your worst matchup most of the time... and then Halfway through the day, you switch to HL Hunter, and they line you up against a Murloc Paladin... WTF RIGGED!!! Right?... Wrong... Good meta players have already moved on to counter the upcoming HL Hunter phase...
I know, I know, this would all mean you're doing something wrong, and we can't have that... You're the best! It's gotta be rigged.
P.S. The way MMR works, is that day 1 winstreak you had lined you up against good players, so you're spending the next few days playing against people who work with the meta... If you hate MMR, it's because you can't keep up with the players you're pitted against after a good run. That is all MMR does... MMR doesn't care what deck you're playing.
It is true, what you speak of. The accounts telling you otherwise are either blizzard employees or bots. They do not want the truth unveiled, even though we know. We must rebel, brother!
If HL Priest is the most popular deck on day 1, day 2 will be full of HL Hunter.... on day 3 everyone will be playing Murloc Paladin to counter the Hunter... On day 4, everyone will be playing Enrage Warrior to counter the Hunter. On day 5 everyone will be back to Priest to counter the Warrior...
That is how a meta works.
This is how the people work:
Lets use a Priest player starting on meta day 3 for this example...
Day 3, they're killing Murloc Pally... They're the best...
Day 4: Crushing some Warriors... OMG how am I not in the grandmasters tour?!?
Day 1: Hmmm, lots of mirror matches... That's okay, I'm 50/50 today, but after the last 2 days I'm still at like a 65-70% winrate! So I RULE!
Day 2: WTF?!? (heads to message boards), "Blizzard is so f@#* rigged!!! I am a really good player! I was CRUSHING it for 3 straight days, and now I can't BUY a win!!! Blizzard is ONLY matching me against my worst matchup!! I HATE THIS NEW MMR SYSTEM!!!!!"
You don't hate the MMR system.. You hate shifting metas... If you keep playing Priest after day 1, you're OBVIOUSLY going to meet your worst matchup most of the time... and then Halfway through the day, you switch to HL Hunter, and they line you up against a Murloc Paladin... WTF RIGGED!!! Right?... Wrong... Good meta players have already moved on to counter the upcoming HL Hunter phase...
I know, I know, this would all mean you're doing something wrong, and we can't have that... You're the best! It's gotta be rigged.
P.S. The way MMR works, is that day 1 winstreak you had lined you up against good players, so you're spending the next few days playing against people who work with the meta... If you hate MMR, it's because you can't keep up with the players you're pitted against after a good run. That is all MMR does... MMR doesn't care what deck you're playing.
I don't think the meta works in such a specific way. First of all many players don't have the dust to craft most/all meta-relevant decks and can only play 1-2 different ones. Or even if they do, most players have a favorite class or two that they play and it's highly unlikely that i.e. a Pirate Warrior or Face Hunter player would switch to Rez Priest. Meta shifts have more to do with slight adaptations to existing decks (like more and more decks running Acidic Swamp Ooze in a meta where weapons are popular, or replacing Eggs with Tol'vir in Warrior decks to better counter aggro, etc...). New decks mostly show up when some elite player comes up with a new idea and puts together a strong deck that noone had thought of before. Like Quest Warlock I think started showing up around 10 days ago but it was not a specific answer/counter to some meta deck, it was simply a very strong deck that noone had thought of last month.
There will often be a rock-paper-scissors balance where deck A beats B which beats C which beats A, but as long as all those decks see some play, players will just accept that once in a while they will have some very bad matchups, which is ok since it is balanced by some equally good matchups on occasion. And from a personal experience I've never encountered the same decks over and over again but always a mix of various meta decks from all classes (for example last two days at low legend over 60 games: 20% DH, 16% Reno Mage, 14% Dragon or Highlander Hunter, etc...)
My conspiracy theory is different. When you are winning a lot during a certain day dont stop. Ive done this mistake several times. "Im like ok it's been a good day, tomorrow i'll continue my climb" but o keep facing counters to my deck and go down.
If u wanna hit legend and u are like rank 3 and above and u are on a roll dont stop until u hit legend. If u leave the rest for the next day u will lose all progress. It has happened to me on the past few days with 2 different accounts. Its probably due to mini pocket metas depending on day of play so my advice is dont stop until u reach legend
It surprises me how players still seem to be wondering about winning and losing streaks.
If those wouldnt happen and it would be all the time 1 win, followed by 1 loss (and occasionally another win to climb) i´d honestly be worried.
Something no one ever answers when it comes to this sort of thing is how do they know what type of decks are being played?
Are you seriously suggesting that it scans both decks during the match making process, hecks the cards, assigns an archetype and then puts it against a strong ir weak archetype that has also been scanned?
im not saying game is rigged, neither its not, but those arguments i read every day in such topics talking about how hard it would be to encode stuff like, as matchups, topdecks, key cards sitting in the bottom, etc, are so hilarius, and its funny they come from the ''reasonable'' side of the debate not the 'conspiracy fans'.
just answer to your self about how hard it is while reading the text in following cards
.....i see that in any point decks, hands and boards state of both sides is scaned and those informations sometimes are being used like in the cards above, and why not some other functions even more fondamental.
Something no one ever answers when it comes to this sort of thing is how do they know what type of decks are being played?
Are you seriously suggesting that it scans both decks during the match making process, hecks the cards, assigns an archetype and then puts it against a strong ir weak archetype that has also been scanned?
im not saying game is rigged, neither its not, but those arguments i read every day in such topics talking about how hard it would be to encode stuff like, as matchups, topdecks, key cards sitting in the bottom, etc, are so hilarius, and its funny they come from the ''reasonable'' side of the debate not the 'conspiracy fans'.
just answer to your self about how hard it is while reading the text in following cards
.....i see that in any point decks, hands and boards state of both sides is scaned and those informations sometimes are being used like in the cards above, and why not some other functions even more fondamental.
Because they are for very different purposes and thus, the intelligence needs to be different.
Genn, for example, that's a simple case of card cost. It doesn't need to read any card text or anticipate the player's reasons for using it. You listed zephrys who struggles with this exact thing. The cards you listed are no where near as sophisticated as the system being discussed. Also, it should be repeatable yeah? It should be consistent and you should be able to demonstrate it? If there was a video which shows someone win 5 in a row vs a specific class and then get matched with a counter class until they've lost and then other people did the same thing then there would be some evidence. Theres no evidence though. It's always pretty random, 'I faced rogue 5 times in a row!', 'I faced rogue 9 times in a row! How and why does the system counter one person with 5 games and another with another number? We're starting to get into what seems like a really advanced, random rigging system here.
The type of reading the OP is complaining about would need a system to scan the entire deck, read the card text, accurately assign an archetype to that deck and then pit it against a player using an archetype that is weak to it.
So the system would have to read all the cards and say 'ah, this is a death rattle rogue, this is strong against X' whereas a different type of rogue deck would then get put against a different class because it is actually weak to whatever dearhrattle rogue is strong against.
Then they would have to amend it constantly due to the meta shifting, expansions would cause problems and I can't see how it wouldn't be such a sink of time and resources all to keep little Barry at diamond 3?
I'd have maybe had a little more time for this if as I said, I didn't see it in almost every game I play. I've played fifa for years, only competitive online and the players there all say the same thing. The actual fact is they aren't as good as they think they are. Everyone gets a bit lucky or unlucky or lag ruins a knee off game etc but it's all conspiracy and rigging on that forum as well, has been for years.
I've never seen anyone know any game prove it and I've never seen someone come out after leaving as a dev or something like that and say 'its rigged and this is how'.
Also, players are very selective with what they say. I take 'I've faced rogue 8 times in a row' with a pinch of salt. I've worked in regulated complaints for 13 years and proven time and time again that people are wrong, are giving false information or are straight up misunderstood.
People won't come around though, even when you produce calls or documented, signed evidence, people will still insist its fraudulent and they've been worked over by the company. It's the same here, no matter what is said or how many times developers will say something isn't done, the same brigade of people will insist that they're lying and they're being done over.
After all this, what really is the benefit? I always see 'player engagement' as a reason but I don't think people actually understand what companies mean with a lot of things and the internet communities will assign their own meanings which catch on and people use phrases or words in that context. People have been kicking off about this for a long time, it clearly wouldn't be a good business idea and if found to be true, would leave them open to all sorts of problems. All for what? A chunk of gutter rank players being gifted some wins so they stay 'engaged'? When Blizzard or any other company talks about engagement through match making, it absolutely won't be that. It will be about giving people challenging and competitive matches rather than it being random and leaving a new player coming to against pro after pro because that isn't a fun experience for either player.
No one is naturally great at everything. There are skill ceilings and some people simply won't get past that at any given activity. People find it easier to lay blame elsewhere though and find other reasons for not being in the very top bracket of whatever they're doing. This is not something unique to HS, I've seen it in almost every type of competitive environment, sport, games, work.
These are also the sorts of people who will say someone only got a job ahead of them because they know someone or some other crap excuse.
The matchmaking does not know which deck you queue up with.
How do you know that? Been at Blizzards design team and mechanics and have insiders knowledge? You saw with your own eyes the inner workings of the matchmaking? I seriously doubt that. Blizzard has reasons enough to exactly know which decks ae queued.
Oh, sorry, I am wrong. They run their matchmaking through a database of 1000s of decks and variations (probably with a specific look on tech cards) to make sure that YOU are getting the matchup YOU deserve at the moment. Before a new release, they have worked all the new metadecks out, and will sure you get countered if you behave badly, even before the players know what the counters are.
Or, maybe they just try to make you find a good MMR matchup ASAP...
About the 50% winrate, yes, that is exactly the point of MMR based matchmaking. You don't need to handpick decks for that, you just need to face better/worse players. As all players are not equal, the very top and very bottom of the MMR ladder will have scewed winrates, but the system will always try to send you to 50% by changing your MMR up and down.
Losing to Sire Denathrius makes me not want to play this game anymore. The Sire Denathrius nerf makes me want to play this game again. Losing to Deathrattle Rogue makes me not want to play this game anymore. The Prince Renathal nerf makes me not want to play this game anymore.
Something no one ever answers when it comes to this sort of thing is how do they know what type of decks are being played?
Are you seriously suggesting that it scans both decks during the match making process, hecks the cards, assigns an archetype and then puts it against a strong ir weak archetype that has also been scanned?
im not saying game is rigged, neither its not, but those arguments i read every day in such topics talking about how hard it would be to encode stuff like, as matchups, topdecks, key cards sitting in the bottom, etc, are so hilarius, and its funny they come from the ''reasonable'' side of the debate not the 'conspiracy fans'.
just answer to your self about how hard it is while reading the text in following cards
.....i see that in any point decks, hands and boards state of both sides is scaned and those informations sometimes are being used like in the cards above, and why not some other functions even more fondamental.
Because they are for very different purposes and thus, the intelligence needs to be different.
Genn, for example, that's a simple case of card cost. It doesn't need to read any card text or anticipate the player's reasons for using it. You listed zephrys who struggles with this exact thing. The cards you listed are no where near as sophisticated as the system being discussed. Also, it should be repeatable yeah? It should be consistent and you should be able to demonstrate it? If there was a video which shows someone win 5 in a row vs a specific class and then get matched with a counter class until they've lost and then other people did the same thing then there would be some evidence. Theres no evidence though. It's always pretty random, 'I faced rogue 5 times in a row!', 'I faced rogue 9 times in a row! How and why does the system counter one person with 5 games and another with another number? We're starting to get into what seems like a really advanced, random rigging system here.
The type of reading the OP is complaining about would need a system to scan the entire deck, read the card text, accurately assign an archetype to that deck and then pit it against a player using an archetype that is weak to it.
So the system would have to read all the cards and say 'ah, this is a death rattle rogue, this is strong against X' whereas a different type of rogue deck would then get put against a different class because it is actually weak to whatever dearhrattle rogue is strong against.
Then they would have to amend it constantly due to the meta shifting, expansions would cause problems and I can't see how it wouldn't be such a sink of time and resources all to keep little Barry at diamond 3?
I'd have maybe had a little more time for this if as I said, I didn't see it in almost every game I play. I've played fifa for years, only competitive online and the players there all say the same thing. The actual fact is they aren't as good as they think they are. Everyone gets a bit lucky or unlucky or lag ruins a knee off game etc but it's all conspiracy and rigging on that forum as well, has been for years.
I've never seen anyone know any game prove it and I've never seen someone come out after leaving as a dev or something like that and say 'its rigged and this is how'.
Also, players are very selective with what they say. I take 'I've faced rogue 8 times in a row' with a pinch of salt. I've worked in regulated complaints for 13 years and proven time and time again that people are wrong, are giving false information or are straight up misunderstood.
People won't come around though, even when you produce calls or documented, signed evidence, people will still insist its fraudulent and they've been worked over by the company. It's the same here, no matter what is said or how many times developers will say something isn't done, the same brigade of people will insist that they're lying and they're being done over.
After all this, what really is the benefit? I always see 'player engagement' as a reason but I don't think people actually understand what companies mean with a lot of things and the internet communities will assign their own meanings which catch on and people use phrases or words in that context. People have been kicking off about this for a long time, it clearly wouldn't be a good business idea and if found to be true, would leave them open to all sorts of problems. All for what? A chunk of gutter rank players being gifted some wins so they stay 'engaged'? When Blizzard or any other company talks about engagement through match making, it absolutely won't be that. It will be about giving people challenging and competitive matches rather than it being random and leaving a new player coming to against pro after pro because that isn't a fun experience for either player.
No one is naturally great at everything. There are skill ceilings and some people simply won't get past that at any given activity. People find it easier to lay blame elsewhere though and find other reasons for not being in the very top bracket of whatever they're doing. This is not something unique to HS, I've seen it in almost every type of competitive environment, sport, games, work.
These are also the sorts of people who will say someone only got a job ahead of them because they know someone or some other crap excuse.
your words...
The type of reading the OP is complaining about would need a system to scan the entire deck, read the card text, accurately assign an archetype to that deck and then pit it against a player using an archetype that is weak to it.
So the system would have to read all the cards and say 'ah, this is a death rattle rogue, this is strong against X' whereas a different type of rogue deck would then get put against a different class because it is actually weak to whatever dearhrattle rogue is strong against.
my answer: it's not rocket science, look at the attachment below and then read again your funny bold words
Yes, of course. Your curve will very accurately determine both your archetype, how you teched it and what counters it. It is the best way for Blizzard to make sure they punish YOU when you behave BADLY by playing their game in wrong ways.
SlydE look very closely and try to think this time what we are talking about and how relates with the new attachment
....frankly i'm really excited about next reply
Come on, man, you can do better. I think we all know they have a way to code their decks, but that does not change the fact the number of decks played on deck on the ladder is enormous and the number possible decks is astronomical. Through rapidly changing metas, they need a formula to determine the likely outcome to punish YOUR deck. They are not even able to code Zephyrs to accurately find the best play.
A better strategy for you: They use core cards (rapidly updated to accurately reflect the meta ofc) to calculate your archetype similar to HSreplay, and then match you with and archetype you have a bad winrate against when YOU are behaving badly.
But why would they? It is a complete waste of resources on a very complex operation that will increase queue time and computing power needed for matchmaking for no reason.
You have to face it, you are just a simple number for the matchmaking bot. Some times you get lucky, some times you don't, but over 100s of games it all evens out, which is why nobody has dug up any statistically relevant evidence for any of these theories yet. The material is there, hsraplay has millions of games recorded, go out there and prove the game is rigged against YOU.
My conspiracy theory is different. When you are winning a lot during a certain day dont stop. Ive done this mistake several times. "Im like ok it's been a good day, tomorrow i'll continue my climb" but o keep facing counters to my deck and go down.
If u wanna hit legend and u are like rank 3 and above and u are on a roll dont stop until u hit legend. If u leave the rest for the next day u will lose all progress. It has happened to me on the past few days with 2 different accounts. Its probably due to mini pocket metas depending on day of play so my advice is dont stop until u reach legend
that's exactly my experience. one day i win almost every match, easy and without a sweat. the next day with the exact same deck i'll lose every single match
Rogue is one of the most popular classes of the game, among the most powerful decks in the meta, and you, playing an archetype that is unfavoured against that class (even homebrewed) and after losing to a lot of said popular and powerful deck, claims it's because there's a conspiracy against you? Please.
Lol it sucks because at legend time to time it matches me against diamond 10 and platinum players each time I am like wtf poor guy was probably on winstrike. They don't even show opponents rank if you are not legend anymore.
Something no one ever answers when it comes to this sort of thing is how do they know what type of decks are being played?
Are you seriously suggesting that it scans both decks during the match making process, hecks the cards, assigns an archetype and then puts it against a strong ir weak archetype that has also been scanned?
No class simply counters another all the time. If you get put against some janky rogue deck then it's no longer a counter. If you have warrior for example, if a counter to enrage warrior is say, control priest then it needs to know its putting aggro vs control for example. If you're playing a control style warrior then the counter is no longer effective so it can't pair those two together because control warrior may absolutely dominate control priest (just examples not suggestions on actual counters in a current meta).
If it simply assigns classes then do they maintain this constantly? Then blindly put rogue vs priest, hunter vs mate etc etc depending on the meta? A counter now may not be a counter by the time an expansion launches and changes the meta.
Then I see this said in other games and I've never seen any evidence for it. The evidence points more towards players having difficulty accepting bad luck or lack of skill and instead they blame the developers rigging the game and ait firmly in denial.
Fifa players do the exact same thing. Go on their forums and you'll see complaints about people losing only because each are rigging the match making.
It's all bullshit in my opinion. Players can't accept losing and blame anything but themselves, this is really common behaviour and so either a number of separate developers are doing this and its never been proven or players are just salty about losing and I know which I would put my money on.
Come with some actual evidence, some coding algorithm or confirmation from someone who works on the game, anything, then we can discuss it. It's all just bad losers and confirmation bias though. Youd be talking about a really crazy match making system that can put the right type of rogue against the right type of priest and one would have to be on a good streak and the other on a bad streak. If both are on good streak then why would they boost the streak of one and not the other? That doesn't fit the conspiracy narrative at all. And what you're saying is the system has managed to do this for 6 games in a row?
Come onnnnn......if I could be bothered then there are several other points which debunk this but I'm assuming anyone who believes this won't read this post or respond to it at least so there's no point. It's very difficult to reason with someone who is being irrational about something and in my experience that's exactly what computer gamer players are about things like this, irrational.
I'd like an answer on how it assigns archetypes though and makes sure that rather than blindly put rogue v priest, it puts x type of rogue vs x type of priest, to ensure it actually rings the match in one players favour.
Thats for playing priest m8
If HL Priest is the most popular deck on day 1, day 2 will be full of HL Hunter.... on day 3 everyone will be playing Murloc Paladin to counter the Hunter... On day 4, everyone will be playing Enrage Warrior to counter the Hunter. On day 5 everyone will be back to Priest to counter the Warrior...
That is how a meta works.
This is how the people work:
Lets use a Priest player starting on meta day 3 for this example...
Day 3, they're killing Murloc Pally... They're the best...
Day 4: Crushing some Warriors... OMG how am I not in the grandmasters tour?!?
Day 1: Hmmm, lots of mirror matches... That's okay, I'm 50/50 today, but after the last 2 days I'm still at like a 65-70% winrate! So I RULE!
Day 2: WTF?!? (heads to message boards), "Blizzard is so f@#* rigged!!! I am a really good player! I was CRUSHING it for 3 straight days, and now I can't BUY a win!!! Blizzard is ONLY matching me against my worst matchup!! I HATE THIS NEW MMR SYSTEM!!!!!"
You don't hate the MMR system.. You hate shifting metas... If you keep playing Priest after day 1, you're OBVIOUSLY going to meet your worst matchup most of the time... and then Halfway through the day, you switch to HL Hunter, and they line you up against a Murloc Paladin... WTF RIGGED!!! Right?... Wrong... Good meta players have already moved on to counter the upcoming HL Hunter phase...
I know, I know, this would all mean you're doing something wrong, and we can't have that... You're the best! It's gotta be rigged.
P.S. The way MMR works, is that day 1 winstreak you had lined you up against good players, so you're spending the next few days playing against people who work with the meta... If you hate MMR, it's because you can't keep up with the players you're pitted against after a good run. That is all MMR does... MMR doesn't care what deck you're playing.
It is true, what you speak of. The accounts telling you otherwise are either blizzard employees or bots. They do not want the truth unveiled, even though we know. We must rebel, brother!
I don't think the meta works in such a specific way. First of all many players don't have the dust to craft most/all meta-relevant decks and can only play 1-2 different ones. Or even if they do, most players have a favorite class or two that they play and it's highly unlikely that i.e. a Pirate Warrior or Face Hunter player would switch to Rez Priest. Meta shifts have more to do with slight adaptations to existing decks (like more and more decks running Acidic Swamp Ooze in a meta where weapons are popular, or replacing Eggs with Tol'vir in Warrior decks to better counter aggro, etc...). New decks mostly show up when some elite player comes up with a new idea and puts together a strong deck that noone had thought of before. Like Quest Warlock I think started showing up around 10 days ago but it was not a specific answer/counter to some meta deck, it was simply a very strong deck that noone had thought of last month.
There will often be a rock-paper-scissors balance where deck A beats B which beats C which beats A, but as long as all those decks see some play, players will just accept that once in a while they will have some very bad matchups, which is ok since it is balanced by some equally good matchups on occasion. And from a personal experience I've never encountered the same decks over and over again but always a mix of various meta decks from all classes (for example last two days at low legend over 60 games: 20% DH, 16% Reno Mage, 14% Dragon or Highlander Hunter, etc...)
It surprises me how players still seem to be wondering about winning and losing streaks.
If those wouldnt happen and it would be all the time 1 win, followed by 1 loss (and occasionally another win to climb) i´d honestly be worried.
Well it's a good thing the new MMR system "sux" instead of sucks... otherwise it would be complete pandemonium.
im not saying game is rigged, neither its not, but those arguments i read every day in such topics talking about how hard it would be to encode stuff like, as matchups, topdecks, key cards sitting in the bottom, etc, are so hilarius, and its funny they come from the ''reasonable'' side of the debate not the 'conspiracy fans'.
just answer to your self about how hard it is while reading the text in following cards
Genn Greymane
Zephrys the Great
Drakkari Trickster
Curious Glimmerroot
Chameleos
King's Elekk
.....i see that in any point decks, hands and boards state of both sides is scaned and those informations sometimes are being used like in the cards above, and why not some other functions even more fondamental.
Because they are for very different purposes and thus, the intelligence needs to be different.
Genn, for example, that's a simple case of card cost. It doesn't need to read any card text or anticipate the player's reasons for using it. You listed zephrys who struggles with this exact thing. The cards you listed are no where near as sophisticated as the system being discussed. Also, it should be repeatable yeah? It should be consistent and you should be able to demonstrate it? If there was a video which shows someone win 5 in a row vs a specific class and then get matched with a counter class until they've lost and then other people did the same thing then there would be some evidence. Theres no evidence though. It's always pretty random, 'I faced rogue 5 times in a row!', 'I faced rogue 9 times in a row! How and why does the system counter one person with 5 games and another with another number? We're starting to get into what seems like a really advanced, random rigging system here.
The type of reading the OP is complaining about would need a system to scan the entire deck, read the card text, accurately assign an archetype to that deck and then pit it against a player using an archetype that is weak to it.
So the system would have to read all the cards and say 'ah, this is a death rattle rogue, this is strong against X' whereas a different type of rogue deck would then get put against a different class because it is actually weak to whatever dearhrattle rogue is strong against.
Then they would have to amend it constantly due to the meta shifting, expansions would cause problems and I can't see how it wouldn't be such a sink of time and resources all to keep little Barry at diamond 3?
I'd have maybe had a little more time for this if as I said, I didn't see it in almost every game I play. I've played fifa for years, only competitive online and the players there all say the same thing. The actual fact is they aren't as good as they think they are. Everyone gets a bit lucky or unlucky or lag ruins a knee off game etc but it's all conspiracy and rigging on that forum as well, has been for years.
I've never seen anyone know any game prove it and I've never seen someone come out after leaving as a dev or something like that and say 'its rigged and this is how'.
Also, players are very selective with what they say. I take 'I've faced rogue 8 times in a row' with a pinch of salt. I've worked in regulated complaints for 13 years and proven time and time again that people are wrong, are giving false information or are straight up misunderstood.
People won't come around though, even when you produce calls or documented, signed evidence, people will still insist its fraudulent and they've been worked over by the company. It's the same here, no matter what is said or how many times developers will say something isn't done, the same brigade of people will insist that they're lying and they're being done over.
After all this, what really is the benefit? I always see 'player engagement' as a reason but I don't think people actually understand what companies mean with a lot of things and the internet communities will assign their own meanings which catch on and people use phrases or words in that context. People have been kicking off about this for a long time, it clearly wouldn't be a good business idea and if found to be true, would leave them open to all sorts of problems. All for what? A chunk of gutter rank players being gifted some wins so they stay 'engaged'? When Blizzard or any other company talks about engagement through match making, it absolutely won't be that. It will be about giving people challenging and competitive matches rather than it being random and leaving a new player coming to against pro after pro because that isn't a fun experience for either player.
No one is naturally great at everything. There are skill ceilings and some people simply won't get past that at any given activity. People find it easier to lay blame elsewhere though and find other reasons for not being in the very top bracket of whatever they're doing. This is not something unique to HS, I've seen it in almost every type of competitive environment, sport, games, work.
These are also the sorts of people who will say someone only got a job ahead of them because they know someone or some other crap excuse.
Oh, sorry, I am wrong. They run their matchmaking through a database of 1000s of decks and variations (probably with a specific look on tech cards) to make sure that YOU are getting the matchup YOU deserve at the moment. Before a new release, they have worked all the new metadecks out, and will sure you get countered if you behave badly, even before the players know what the counters are.
Or, maybe they just try to make you find a good MMR matchup ASAP...
About the 50% winrate, yes, that is exactly the point of MMR based matchmaking. You don't need to handpick decks for that, you just need to face better/worse players. As all players are not equal, the very top and very bottom of the MMR ladder will have scewed winrates, but the system will always try to send you to 50% by changing your MMR up and down.
Editor of the Heartpwn Legendary Crafting Guide:
https://www.hearthpwn.com/forums/hearthstone-general/card-discussion/205920-legendary-tier-list-crafting-guide
I don't know why priest gets so much hate.. it's not even resurrect anymore.
Now it's "ME GO RANDOM, ME WIN", so not much better.
Standard, Wild, and Classic player.Losing to Sire Denathrius makes me not want to play this game anymore.The Sire Denathrius nerf makes me want to play this game again.
Losing to Deathrattle Rogue makes me not want to play this game anymore.
The Prince Renathal nerf makes me not want to play this game anymore.
your words...
The type of reading the OP is complaining about would need a system to scan the entire deck, read the card text, accurately assign an archetype to that deck and then pit it against a player using an archetype that is weak to it.
So the system would have to read all the cards and say 'ah, this is a death rattle rogue, this is strong against X' whereas a different type of rogue deck would then get put against a different class because it is actually weak to whatever dearhrattle rogue is strong against.
my answer: it's not rocket science, look at the attachment below and then read again your funny bold words
Yes, of course. Your curve will very accurately determine both your archetype, how you teched it and what counters it. It is the best way for Blizzard to make sure they punish YOU when you behave BADLY by playing their game in wrong ways.
Editor of the Heartpwn Legendary Crafting Guide:
https://www.hearthpwn.com/forums/hearthstone-general/card-discussion/205920-legendary-tier-list-crafting-guide
hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha.
really bro?
the curve?
i mean, really?
SlydE look very closely and try to think this time what we are talking about and how relates with the new attachment
....frankly i'm really excited about next reply
Come on, man, you can do better. I think we all know they have a way to code their decks, but that does not change the fact the number of decks played on deck on the ladder is enormous and the number possible decks is astronomical. Through rapidly changing metas, they need a formula to determine the likely outcome to punish YOUR deck. They are not even able to code Zephyrs to accurately find the best play.
A better strategy for you: They use core cards (rapidly updated to accurately reflect the meta ofc) to calculate your archetype similar to HSreplay, and then match you with and archetype you have a bad winrate against when YOU are behaving badly.
But why would they? It is a complete waste of resources on a very complex operation that will increase queue time and computing power needed for matchmaking for no reason.
You have to face it, you are just a simple number for the matchmaking bot. Some times you get lucky, some times you don't, but over 100s of games it all evens out, which is why nobody has dug up any statistically relevant evidence for any of these theories yet. The material is there, hsraplay has millions of games recorded, go out there and prove the game is rigged against YOU.
Editor of the Heartpwn Legendary Crafting Guide:
https://www.hearthpwn.com/forums/hearthstone-general/card-discussion/205920-legendary-tier-list-crafting-guide