I decided to make this thread because I recently saw a lot of posts of people claiming that Hearthstone's MM is rigged and if you go over 50% win rate it "cheats" you by queueing you against your counters, give you bad cards in the mulligan or draw, etc.
Of course, like everyone else, I had my highs and lows (with win/lose streaks going on two digits range at times), but I never felt that the system is rigged or that I'm cheated in any way, and by tracking my win rates at the end of each month I was able to notice two things: that each and every month I got over 50% win rate and that the win rate was pretty consistent at the end of each month.
But enough with the "feeling"; I should better get to the facts and give you the cold numbers. But, before that, I should probably give some details about my play style to better get the context: I play at most six games per day, which take an hour at most (so I usually average less than 180 games per month), with the best possible deck that matches my daily quest (so that means that I don't play a deck enough to really master it and that I don't always play tier 1 decks because not all classes have them). I'm also a decent player (reaching legend in most months and having a couple of top legend rankings), but I'm definitely nowhere close to calling myself an expert, a hardcore, or a pro player.
And now the numbers (print screens to prove them will be provided at the end of the post):
December 2017: 61% win rate (83-52) January 2018: 68% win rate (57-27) February 2018: 68% win rate (61-29) March 2018: 62% win rate (92-56) April 2018: 58% win rate (104-76) May 2018: 57% win rate (79-59) June 2018: 67% win rate (85-41)
--- that was my best month ever, ending the month in top 5 legend and holding for a while even the #1 legend, at which point I had a hard time finding new challenges in the game so took a half-year break ---
January 2019: 66% win rate (129-65) February 2019: 57% win rate (112-85) March 2019: 61% win rate (114-72) April 2019: 61% win rate (81-51) May 2019: 57% win rate (79-59) June 2019: 74% win rate (34-12) July 2019: 67% (8-4) August 2019: 57% (134-100) September 2019: 61% (17-11) October 2019: 57% (79-59) November 2019: 57% (75-57) December 2019: 57% (75-57) January 2020: 57% (35-26) February 2020: 58% (50-36) March 2020: 61% (35-22) April 2020: 57% (103-77)
The average (excluding the two months with less than 50 games) was 60.1%; out of the 21 tracked months only four months (two which were during the old system where we were all resetted back to rank 18, so first few games were almost auto wins and two during which I had a lot of luck and managed to end the month in top 10 legend) had a variation of more than 3% from my average 60% win rate, while during the rest of 17 out of 21 I consistently had between 57% and 63% win rate. And, btw, this month I'm also at 58% win rate far now.
I think that, while it can still somehow be seen as anecdotical evidence since they're just my personal games, there is enough evidence to see that there is a pattern that says that no, the game is not forcing everyone at 50% win rate, but it just aims too point everyone toward that value via MMR, but, ultimately, everyone's win rate is a personal constant dependent of their skill compared with the skill of the average player - a better player will have higher than 50% win rate (the better the player, the better the win rate) and a bad player will have lower than 50% win rate (the worse the player, the lower the win rate) - the MMR is simply trying to limit those variations so we don't end up having people with 80% and people with 20% win rates.
So, seriously, if you think Blizzard is artificially capping your win rate at 50% win rate and it simply doesn't let you break over it, how you explain the fact that in 23 tracked months, spawning over three years and a lot of various expansions and metas my win rate never fall bellow 57% (and that while still being a rather regular/casual player playing at most one hour a day and switching decks/classes depending on whatever daily quest I get)?
This whole conclusion is an example of someone who doesn't know how to read the data or how to ask the proper questions. The data shows that you are being kept at a 50%-61% win-rate, excluding seven outliers, one of which is at such a small sample size the data becomes redundant. This is not proof that "you are being kept at a 50% win-rate", but that you are either garbage at the game or your match-ups are being doctored to bring you closer to a 50% win-rate. I.E. you're being matched with an unfavorable opponent/class/deck in order to bring your win rate more in-line with the preferred percentage. If this wasn't the case, many players in legendary would have win-rates in the 75%-90% range.
This whole conclusion is an example of someone who doesn't know how to read the data or how to ask the proper questions. The data shows that you are being kept at a 50%-61% win-rate, excluding seven outliers, one of which is at such a small sample size the data becomes redundant. This is not proof that "you are being kept at a 50% win-rate", but that you are either garbage at the game or your match-ups are being doctored to bring you closer to a 50% win-rate. I.E. you're being matched with an unfavorable opponent/class/deck in order to bring your win rate more in-line with the preferred percentage. If this wasn't the case, many players in legendary would have win-rates in the 75%-90% range.
By definition, Hearthstone is a zero-sum game, meaning that the average win rate across all players will always be 50% (actually a bit less because of the draws, but they're so rare, that we can safely ignore them), so I really fail to see how you can say that someone who has, by definition, higher than average rating (since 61% which is my average is definitely higher [I would dare to say even way higher] than 50% which is the overall average across all players)...
Also, the reason why you don't see people with 90% or so win rate is not that the system is cheating you, but just because you are matched with people with a similar record as yours and you eventually reach a point where you face only people with a similar skillset and you simply can't continue to win much more than 50%. Initially, at the start of the month, (especially in the old system) when everyone was resetted at the same level, it was typical for the pros to climb very fast, many times with a very high win rate, 'till reaching legend (or high legend), but once you get there you'll face people of similar rank/skill and you simply can no longer maintain such a win rate.
I'm really mindblown how you can't grasp such a simple concept which you see everywhere, even in real life... think at a tennis competition (or any other sport)... the pros usually have easy wins in the first few rounds where they face weaker opponents, but as they progress farther in the tournament they just start facing harder opponents (which advanced there too) and they can't keep winning all the time...
This whole conclusion is an example of someone who doesn't know how to read the data or how to ask the proper questions. The data shows that you are being kept at a 50%-61% win-rate, excluding seven outliers, one of which is at such a small sample size the data becomes redundant. This is not proof that "you are being kept at a 50% win-rate", but that you are either garbage at the game or your match-ups are being doctored to bring you closer to a 50% win-rate. I.E. you're being matched with an unfavorable opponent/class/deck in order to bring your win rate more in-line with the preferred percentage. If this wasn't the case, many players in legendary would have win-rates in the 75%-90% range.
By definition, Hearthstone is a zero-sum game, meaning that the average win rate across all players will always be 50% (actually a bit less because of the draws, but they're so rare, that we can safely ignore them), so I really fail to see how you can say that someone who has, by definition, higher than average rating (since 61% which is my average is definitely higher [I would dare to say even way higher] than 50% which is the overall average across all players)...
Also, the reason why you don't see people with 90% or so win rate is not that the system is cheating you, but just because you are matched with people with a similar record as yours and you eventually reach a point where you face only people with a similar skillset and you simply can't continue to win much more than 50%. Initially, at the start of the month, (especially in the old system) when everyone was resetted at the same level, it was typical for the pros to climb very fast, many times with a very high win rate, 'till reaching legend (or high legend), but once you get there you'll face people of similar rank/skill and you simply can no longer maintain such a win rate.
I'm really mindblown how you can't grasp such a simple concept which you see everywhere, even in real life... think at a tennis competition (or any other sport)... the pros usually have easy wins in the first few rounds where they face weaker opponents, but as they progress farther in the tournament they just start facing harder opponents (which advanced there too) and they can't keep winning all the time...
I think you're better off giving up mate, you're absolutely correct but people will believe what they want to believe and that usually ties in with something that makes them 'feel better'. It tends to make them irrational and just leads to feeling like you're banging your head against a brick wall.
I've said before that competition is healthy, no one wants to see uncompetitive, one sided sports or games. Well, a few enjoy it but they will be more inclined to care more about winning than what they are actually doing. Generally peole want to compete against competent peers. So the system is designed to do that. Just like in regular sport.
What you have in a lot of these conversations is the HS equivalent of a football team in league 1 (third tier of professional football). A team that is too good to get relegated but not good enough to get promoted. They might make the play offs here and there and might even get a promotion, before being relegated straight back down again. They are say at their level. It would be like them complaining that the system is rigged against them because everytime they get to the play offs it's always against a team that finished higher than them and they are being cheated out of their rightful place.
If you're stuck at gold consistently, gold is your level. Same applies to platinum or any other level. You either need to invest more, so you can get better cards, decks and compete better or you need to get better. Some people won't be able to do either and theres nothing wrong with that, they just need to accept that its the case.
What I'd like to know is if Blizzard are deciding to keep someone at platinum 10-6 month after month, why don't they do it other people? Those who hit legend consistently and quickly, why are they immune from this algorithm that stops peole progressing? What about the platinum player has led to them specifically being targeted? Why would Blizzard even want to?
I've asked these same questions on the fifa forums, where they blame EA for their win/loss in their weekend competitions and no one ever gives a good answer.
I know people want to ASSUME it's not rigged, but I played hundreds and hundreds of games these past couple months (maybe even thousands) due to corona and when I play at diamond 5 to legend using a certain deck/class for a while, I will match its counter over and over again, then when I go to switch to a deck that counters THAT one, all of a sudden the deck/class I was just playing against repeatedly is NOWHERE to be seen, and I'm now playing against other classes/decks that counter the NEW deck over and over. This happens even more frequently on your game that will give you legend (I faced a direct counter 7 times in a row last season each time I was going for my legend game).
Now obviously there is no way to keep people at exactly 50%, so the people arguing that because some decks have close to 60% winrate its not rigged are clueless. The system is designed to TRY to keep you at 50%, but with random luck and RNG and human misplays, it's not always going to be successful.
It's definitely not coincidence. There's some hidden variables here.
I played several games in casual mode In the last few days and faced many opponents who play top meta decks so no unfavourable conditions there. The only difference?? Matchmaking!
I won more than 90% of over 40 games as I was not constantly facing murloc pally when playing with hl hunter.
when I switch to ranked, then it’s only tempo dh / face hunter / the odd hl hunter with identical deck as mine and murloc pallies I am playing against. Oh the randomness....
I know people want to ASSUME it's not rigged, but I played hundreds and hundreds of games these past couple months (maybe even thousands) due to corona and when I play at diamond 5 to legend using a certain deck/class for a while, I will match its counter over and over again, then when I go to switch to a deck that counters THAT one, all of a sudden the deck/class I was just playing against repeatedly is NOWHERE to be seen, and I'm now playing against other classes/decks that counter the NEW deck over and over. This happens even more frequently on your game that will give you legend (I faced a direct counter 7 times in a row last season each time I was going for my legend game).
Now obviously there is no way to keep people at exactly 50%, so the people arguing that because some decks have close to 60% winrate its not rigged are clueless. The system is designed to TRY to keep you at 50%, but with random luck and RNG and human misplays, it's not always going to be successful.
It's definitely not coincidence. There's some hidden variables here.
Give some evidence then instead of just anecdotal stories. It all just sounds like confirmation bias. It's been studied and shown time and time again that people's memories or 'feelings' about what happened is usually very far from the actual truth. What you're describing isnt consistent, if it was then there would be video after video showing it and Blizzard would have been absolutely called out for it. It would be repeatable and demonstrable but all you ever see is exactly what you're saying.
At least post your deck tracker showing all of your matchups etc. If it's coded to match you against a counter deck then it would be easy to see when this kicks in and I'd be able to boot the game up, use the exact deck you were and find the same set of match ups once I get a win streak going.
Now imagine if 1000 peole were all able to do that and get the same result each time. That's actual evidence, your 'feelings' are not only irrelevant in a discussion about this sort of thing, they are almost certainly wrong.
Why do you get that sort of thing happen but say, Boarcontrol doesn't? Why are Blizzard picking you out and keeping you in the gutter but not him? Or the others that cruise to legend with one deck?
My hat is not made of tinfoil! Its made of brains! I am the best HS player in the internets and the only reason I'm not a world champ is because of RIGGED MMR and matchmaking and RNG effects!
we have linked the patent for matchmaking, they say nah that’s not proof, we have quoted statements from their forums from blizzard admins that they try to keep win rate at 50%, nah that’s not enough... people play for years and notice a pattern, nah not enough, it’s random... oh and the earth is flat right?
we have linked the patent for matchmaking, they say nah that’s not proof, we have quoted statements from their forums from blizzard admins that they try to keep win rate at 50%, nah that’s not enough... people play for years and notice a pattern, nah not enough, it’s random... oh and the earth is flat right?
They try to keep the winrate at 50% for casual mode. Ben Brode said that once " No matter how bad of a player you are , you will end up at 50% eventually, but this mm only applies to casual ".
As many people above me mentioned, the matchmaking isn’t rigged. Also there would literally be no upside keeping little Jimmy at a lower rank. As in dozens of threads before this has been talked about, and once people end up with no evidence and calling each other flat earthers, i wonder why mods don’t close those pointless threads.
we have linked the patent for matchmaking, they say nah that’s not proof, we have quoted statements from their forums from blizzard admins that they try to keep win rate at 50%, nah that’s not enough... people play for years and notice a pattern, nah not enough, it’s random... oh and the earth is flat right?
They try to keep the winrate at 50% for casual mode. Ben Brode said that once " No matter how bad of a player you are , you will end up at 50% eventually, but this mm only applies to casual ".
As many people above me mentioned, the matchmaking isn’t rigged. Also there would literally be no upside keeping little Jimmy at a lower rank. As in dozens of threads before this has been talked about, and once people end up with no evidence and calling each other flat earthers, i wonder why mods don’t close those pointless threads.
Why reply if you find it pointless... they keep them open as ppl have an interest in them.
And by the way my win rate in casual is much higher than ranked, playing against the same meta decks that is, but no matchmaking. No one said it’s rigged all we are saying is that it’s not random...
I really never understand the logic of people thinking the game is rigged to keep players around 50%. It is card game so the very nature of deck shuffling and draw order is going to strongly diminish anyone's chances of victory. This isn't a game like a FPS where knowledge of a games' mechanics, hand/eye coordination and excellent reaction time will allow you to be successful 75%+ of the time.
It's more relatable to sports gambling where it's easy to predict winners and losers on paper but the outcome is still determined by human beings whose actions throw in a level of unpredictability that nobody can account for. In that activity, you need to hit your picks at roughly 54% in order to be considered "victorious"/turn a profit and even the professional gamblers who are considered the best of the best in the world will only be 60 - 62% successful over the long run.
Working hard to celebrate Blizzards excellent A.I. ability to make it all ook like non-rigging. Reminding me of the flatlanders 'proving' that flat is all there is. Anyways the only credible way is an independent investigation into Blizzard MMR/RNG mechanics. And with independent I mean independent.
When you have 24 months worth of data of both ranked and arena games all converging to about the same (+/-3%) win rate, which is quite different than the average 50%, I think it's quite obvious that the system is not rigged to keep us at 50% win rate (because otherwise, it would do a terrible job letting me constantly score over 57% win rate.
Rigging can't be proved or disproved by collecting data from the outside.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
We make our world significant through the courage of our questions and the depth of our answers.
This whole conclusion is an example of someone who doesn't know how to read the data or how to ask the proper questions. The data shows that you are being kept at a 50%-61% win-rate, excluding seven outliers, one of which is at such a small sample size the data becomes redundant. This is not proof that "you are being kept at a 50% win-rate", but that you are either garbage at the game or your match-ups are being doctored to bring you closer to a 50% win-rate. I.E. you're being matched with an unfavorable opponent/class/deck in order to bring your win rate more in-line with the preferred percentage. If this wasn't the case, many players in legendary would have win-rates in the 75%-90% range.
Also, the reason why you don't see people with 90% or so win rate is not that the system is cheating you, but just because you are matched with people with a similar record as yours and you eventually reach a point where you face only people with a similar skillset and you simply can't continue to win much more than 50%. Initially, at the start of the month, (especially in the old system) when everyone was resetted at the same level, it was typical for the pros to climb very fast, many times with a very high win rate, 'till reaching legend (or high legend), but once you get there you'll face people of similar rank/skill and you simply can no longer maintain such a win rate.
You're really using some mental gymnastics to skew the perception of the data to your liking. Unfortunately, you're failing to see that MMR is literally Blizzard's way of artificially bringing everyone's win-rates closer to their preferred percentage. Divisional ranking is much more fair and appropriate, as it allows for good players to climb the ladder quickly without artificial roadblocks bringing them down (Divisional matchmaking is random within your division, while MMR is doctored based on "perceived skill level").
Hello. I am a blizzard employee and work with the game developers for hearthstone. I a can neither confirm or deny these allegations, but I can give you my opinion on this subject. Blizzard is fart and poop and fat and ugly and hearthstone is rigged poop poop poop
I decided to make this thread because I recently saw a lot of posts of people claiming that Hearthstone's MM is rigged and if you go over 50% win rate it "cheats" you by queueing you against your counters, give you bad cards in the mulligan or draw, etc.
Of course, like everyone else, I had my highs and lows (with win/lose streaks going on two digits range at times), but I never felt that the system is rigged or that I'm cheated in any way, and by tracking my win rates at the end of each month I was able to notice two things: that each and every month I got over 50% win rate and that the win rate was pretty consistent at the end of each month.
But enough with the "feeling"; I should better get to the facts and give you the cold numbers. But, before that, I should probably give some details about my play style to better get the context: I play at most six games per day, which take an hour at most (so I usually average less than 180 games per month), with the best possible deck that matches my daily quest (so that means that I don't play a deck enough to really master it and that I don't always play tier 1 decks because not all classes have them). I'm also a decent player (reaching legend in most months and having a couple of top legend rankings), but I'm definitely nowhere close to calling myself an expert, a hardcore, or a pro player.
And now the numbers (print screens to prove them will be provided at the end of the post):
December 2017: 61% win rate (83-52) January 2018: 68% win rate (57-27) February 2018: 68% win rate (61-29) March 2018: 62% win rate (92-56) April 2018: 58% win rate (104-76) May 2018: 57% win rate (79-59) June 2018: 67% win rate (85-41)
--- that was my best month ever, ending the month in top 5 legend and holding for a while even the #1 legend, at which point I had a hard time finding new challenges in the game so took a half-year break ---
January 2019: 66% win rate (129-65) February 2019: 57% win rate (112-85) March 2019: 61% win rate (114-72) April 2019: 61% win rate (81-51) May 2019: 57% win rate (79-59) June 2019: 74% win rate (34-12) July 2019: 67% (8-4) August 2019: 57% (134-100) September 2019: 61% (17-11) October 2019: 57% (79-59) November 2019: 57% (75-57) December 2019: 57% (75-57) January 2020: 57% (35-26) February 2020: 58% (50-36) March 2020: 61% (35-22) April 2020: 57% (103-77)
The average (excluding the two months with less than 50 games) was 60.1%; out of the 21 tracked months only four months (two which were during the old system where we were all resetted back to rank 18, so first few games were almost auto wins and two during which I had a lot of luck and managed to end the month in top 10 legend) had a variation of more than 3% from my average 60% win rate, while during the rest of 17 out of 21 I consistently had between 57% and 63% win rate. And, btw, this month I'm also at 58% win rate far now.
I think that, while it can still somehow be seen as anecdotical evidence since they're just my personal games, there is enough evidence to see that there is a pattern that says that no, the game is not forcing everyone at 50% win rate, but it just aims too point everyone toward that value via MMR, but, ultimately, everyone's win rate is a personal constant dependent of their skill compared with the skill of the average player - a better player will have higher than 50% win rate (the better the player, the better the win rate) and a bad player will have lower than 50% win rate (the worse the player, the lower the win rate) - the MMR is simply trying to limit those variations so we don't end up having people with 80% and people with 20% win rates.
So, seriously, if you think Blizzard is artificially capping your win rate at 50% win rate and it simply doesn't let you break over it, how you explain the fact that in 23 tracked months, spawning over three years and a lot of various expansions and metas my win rate never fall bellow 57% (and that while still being a rather regular/casual player playing at most one hour a day and switching decks/classes depending on whatever daily quest I get)?
Working hard to celebrate Blizzards excellent A.I. ability to make it all ook like non-rigging. Reminding me of the flatlanders 'proving' that flat is all there is. Anyways the only credible way is an independent investigation into Blizzard MMR/RNG mechanics. And with independent I mean independent.
Or you can come up with a dataset remotely close to what this guy has proving that the game actually IS rigged.
But no, you are too lazy or incompetent.
Guys like you have said the same thing for YEARS, but no reasonable attempt of proving rigging has ever been presented. It is not that hard, the data is easily accessible.
The very fact that Blizzard persistently doesn't open up about the actual inner working/goal of MMR and RNG - just stating the obvious - telltale available data can't conclusively decide on the subject. On the idiot side of the matter, I love telling flatlanders there's a third dimension, eventhough I realize they think me crazy. Speaking doubt to certainly makes people come out of their echo chamber....eventually. For every fellow traveller comes a time of reckoning...sooner or later.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
We make our world significant through the courage of our questions and the depth of our answers.
It's a lost cause, Scarface. A significant portion of folks have just decided the answer to this question without any interest in the truth of the matter. I posted a while ago what it would take to address this thing statistically, and until someone comes up with the data, there isn't much to discuss.
I seriously doubt folks even understand the null hypothesis game you have to play with this sort of proof. Someone pulled the, "well where's your proof that it IS random?", a question which in itself displays a lack of understanding of what we're doing here. In any case, appreciate the effort.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Helpful Clarification on Forbidden Topics for Hearthstone Forums:
Enjoying Americans winning in the Olympics is forbidden because it is political. A 14 plus page discussion of state-sponsored lawsuits against a multi-national corporation based on harassment, discrimination, and wrongful death allegations is apparently not political enough to raise an issue.
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
This whole conclusion is an example of someone who doesn't know how to read the data or how to ask the proper questions. The data shows that you are being kept at a 50%-61% win-rate, excluding seven outliers, one of which is at such a small sample size the data becomes redundant. This is not proof that "you are being kept at a 50% win-rate", but that you are either garbage at the game or your match-ups are being doctored to bring you closer to a 50% win-rate. I.E. you're being matched with an unfavorable opponent/class/deck in order to bring your win rate more in-line with the preferred percentage. If this wasn't the case, many players in legendary would have win-rates in the 75%-90% range.
By definition, Hearthstone is a zero-sum game, meaning that the average win rate across all players will always be 50% (actually a bit less because of the draws, but they're so rare, that we can safely ignore them), so I really fail to see how you can say that someone who has, by definition, higher than average rating (since 61% which is my average is definitely higher [I would dare to say even way higher] than 50% which is the overall average across all players)...
Also, the reason why you don't see people with 90% or so win rate is not that the system is cheating you, but just because you are matched with people with a similar record as yours and you eventually reach a point where you face only people with a similar skillset and you simply can't continue to win much more than 50%. Initially, at the start of the month, (especially in the old system) when everyone was resetted at the same level, it was typical for the pros to climb very fast, many times with a very high win rate, 'till reaching legend (or high legend), but once you get there you'll face people of similar rank/skill and you simply can no longer maintain such a win rate.
I'm really mindblown how you can't grasp such a simple concept which you see everywhere, even in real life... think at a tennis competition (or any other sport)... the pros usually have easy wins in the first few rounds where they face weaker opponents, but as they progress farther in the tournament they just start facing harder opponents (which advanced there too) and they can't keep winning all the time...
I think you're better off giving up mate, you're absolutely correct but people will believe what they want to believe and that usually ties in with something that makes them 'feel better'. It tends to make them irrational and just leads to feeling like you're banging your head against a brick wall.
I've said before that competition is healthy, no one wants to see uncompetitive, one sided sports or games. Well, a few enjoy it but they will be more inclined to care more about winning than what they are actually doing. Generally peole want to compete against competent peers. So the system is designed to do that. Just like in regular sport.
What you have in a lot of these conversations is the HS equivalent of a football team in league 1 (third tier of professional football). A team that is too good to get relegated but not good enough to get promoted. They might make the play offs here and there and might even get a promotion, before being relegated straight back down again. They are say at their level. It would be like them complaining that the system is rigged against them because everytime they get to the play offs it's always against a team that finished higher than them and they are being cheated out of their rightful place.
If you're stuck at gold consistently, gold is your level. Same applies to platinum or any other level. You either need to invest more, so you can get better cards, decks and compete better or you need to get better. Some people won't be able to do either and theres nothing wrong with that, they just need to accept that its the case.
What I'd like to know is if Blizzard are deciding to keep someone at platinum 10-6 month after month, why don't they do it other people? Those who hit legend consistently and quickly, why are they immune from this algorithm that stops peole progressing? What about the platinum player has led to them specifically being targeted? Why would Blizzard even want to?
I've asked these same questions on the fifa forums, where they blame EA for their win/loss in their weekend competitions and no one ever gives a good answer.
I know people want to ASSUME it's not rigged, but I played hundreds and hundreds of games these past couple months (maybe even thousands) due to corona and when I play at diamond 5 to legend using a certain deck/class for a while, I will match its counter over and over again, then when I go to switch to a deck that counters THAT one, all of a sudden the deck/class I was just playing against repeatedly is NOWHERE to be seen, and I'm now playing against other classes/decks that counter the NEW deck over and over. This happens even more frequently on your game that will give you legend (I faced a direct counter 7 times in a row last season each time I was going for my legend game).
Now obviously there is no way to keep people at exactly 50%, so the people arguing that because some decks have close to 60% winrate its not rigged are clueless. The system is designed to TRY to keep you at 50%, but with random luck and RNG and human misplays, it's not always going to be successful.
It's definitely not coincidence. There's some hidden variables here.
I played several games in casual mode In the last few days and faced many opponents who play top meta decks so no unfavourable conditions there. The only difference?? Matchmaking!
I won more than 90% of over 40 games as I was not constantly facing murloc pally when playing with hl hunter.
when I switch to ranked, then it’s only tempo dh / face hunter / the odd hl hunter with identical deck as mine and murloc pallies I am playing against. Oh the randomness....
Give some evidence then instead of just anecdotal stories. It all just sounds like confirmation bias. It's been studied and shown time and time again that people's memories or 'feelings' about what happened is usually very far from the actual truth. What you're describing isnt consistent, if it was then there would be video after video showing it and Blizzard would have been absolutely called out for it. It would be repeatable and demonstrable but all you ever see is exactly what you're saying.
At least post your deck tracker showing all of your matchups etc. If it's coded to match you against a counter deck then it would be easy to see when this kicks in and I'd be able to boot the game up, use the exact deck you were and find the same set of match ups once I get a win streak going.
Now imagine if 1000 peole were all able to do that and get the same result each time. That's actual evidence, your 'feelings' are not only irrelevant in a discussion about this sort of thing, they are almost certainly wrong.
Why do you get that sort of thing happen but say, Boarcontrol doesn't? Why are Blizzard picking you out and keeping you in the gutter but not him? Or the others that cruise to legend with one deck?
OMG corporate schilL!
My hat is not made of tinfoil! Its made of brains! I am the best HS player in the internets and the only reason I'm not a world champ is because of RIGGED MMR and matchmaking and RNG effects!
Great post, OP! Thank you for all your tracking.
Show us your evidence then that it’s random...
we have linked the patent for matchmaking, they say nah that’s not proof, we have quoted statements from their forums from blizzard admins that they try to keep win rate at 50%, nah that’s not enough... people play for years and notice a pattern, nah not enough, it’s random... oh and the earth is flat right?
It is like the "Players" movie. If you don't spend enough on the game or if you don't have followers, you know the rest....^^
They try to keep the winrate at 50% for casual mode. Ben Brode said that once " No matter how bad of a player you are , you will end up at 50% eventually, but this mm only applies to casual ".
As many people above me mentioned, the matchmaking isn’t rigged. Also there would literally be no upside keeping little Jimmy at a lower rank. As in dozens of threads before this has been talked about, and once people end up with no evidence and calling each other flat earthers, i wonder why mods don’t close those pointless threads.
Why reply if you find it pointless... they keep them open as ppl have an interest in them.
And by the way my win rate in casual is much higher than ranked, playing against the same meta decks that is, but no matchmaking. No one said it’s rigged all we are saying is that it’s not random...
I really never understand the logic of people thinking the game is rigged to keep players around 50%. It is card game so the very nature of deck shuffling and draw order is going to strongly diminish anyone's chances of victory. This isn't a game like a FPS where knowledge of a games' mechanics, hand/eye coordination and excellent reaction time will allow you to be successful 75%+ of the time.
It's more relatable to sports gambling where it's easy to predict winners and losers on paper but the outcome is still determined by human beings whose actions throw in a level of unpredictability that nobody can account for. In that activity, you need to hit your picks at roughly 54% in order to be considered "victorious"/turn a profit and even the professional gamblers who are considered the best of the best in the world will only be 60 - 62% successful over the long run.
Rigging can't be proved or disproved by collecting data from the outside.
We make our world significant through the courage of our questions and the depth of our answers.
You're really using some mental gymnastics to skew the perception of the data to your liking. Unfortunately, you're failing to see that MMR is literally Blizzard's way of artificially bringing everyone's win-rates closer to their preferred percentage. Divisional ranking is much more fair and appropriate, as it allows for good players to climb the ladder quickly without artificial roadblocks bringing them down (Divisional matchmaking is random within your division, while MMR is doctored based on "perceived skill level").
How did you put it?
Ironic.
Hello. I am a blizzard employee and work with the game developers for hearthstone. I a can neither confirm or deny these allegations, but I can give you my opinion on this subject. Blizzard is fart and poop and fat and ugly and hearthstone is rigged poop poop poop
Or you can come up with a dataset remotely close to what this guy has proving that the game actually IS rigged.
But no, you are too lazy or incompetent.
Guys like you have said the same thing for YEARS, but no reasonable attempt of proving rigging has ever been presented. It is not that hard, the data is easily accessible.
Editor of the Heartpwn Legendary Crafting Guide:
https://www.hearthpwn.com/forums/hearthstone-general/card-discussion/205920-legendary-tier-list-crafting-guide
Don't engage with that dude. He's a fucking idiot.
Lol, it is funny he still comes around for these threads. Where was that giant one a few years back which eventually got locked and Hooghout banned?
Editor of the Heartpwn Legendary Crafting Guide:
https://www.hearthpwn.com/forums/hearthstone-general/card-discussion/205920-legendary-tier-list-crafting-guide
The very fact that Blizzard persistently doesn't open up about the actual inner working/goal of MMR and RNG - just stating the obvious - telltale available data can't conclusively decide on the subject. On the idiot side of the matter, I love telling flatlanders there's a third dimension, eventhough I realize they think me crazy. Speaking doubt to certainly makes people come out of their echo chamber....eventually. For every fellow traveller comes a time of reckoning...sooner or later.
We make our world significant through the courage of our questions and the depth of our answers.
It's a lost cause, Scarface. A significant portion of folks have just decided the answer to this question without any interest in the truth of the matter. I posted a while ago what it would take to address this thing statistically, and until someone comes up with the data, there isn't much to discuss.
I seriously doubt folks even understand the null hypothesis game you have to play with this sort of proof. Someone pulled the, "well where's your proof that it IS random?", a question which in itself displays a lack of understanding of what we're doing here. In any case, appreciate the effort.
Helpful Clarification on Forbidden Topics for Hearthstone Forums:
Enjoying Americans winning in the Olympics is forbidden because it is political. A 14 plus page discussion of state-sponsored lawsuits against a multi-national corporation based on harassment, discrimination, and wrongful death allegations is apparently not political enough to raise an issue.