At regular legend MMR, I haven’t seen a Warlock, Shaman, or Druid in a couple days now. I’ve probably played around 50 games over the past 3 days. I see Priest and Rogue once in awhile. It’s mainly just Face Hunter, Soul DH, Pure Paladin, Bomb Warrior, and Cyclone Mage.
Checked out my own HSReplay chart for this month, and it looks very similar to the OP's ....except.... my Hunter opponents are the smallest at only 3%. (DH and Warriors are the two biggest at 19% each).
I have been playing as Hunter - can it be possible, that my class changes what kind of opponents I get?? That's been a common conspiracy theory, but I think that's an illusion - just the luck of the draw....
I have been playing as Hunter - can it be possible, that my class changes what kind of opponents I get?? That's been a common conspiracy theory, but I think that's an illusion - just the luck of the draw....
Be carefull with what you say, there are some overheated fanboys who don't like these kind of comments.
I think it is not the class you play but the deck you play affects which opponent you will get.
This looks like a proper indication of the meta, even too much in favour of less popular classes. Hunter, DH, Pala and Warrior are the most popular classes and you played them the most. But you also played other classes, just rarer. So what's exactly wrong with this chart for you?
You have 8 Warriors, but 7 Shamans, 6 Mages... There is no gap in your statistics, you played a bit against all classes. I mean I don't know what you expected. There are tiers in hearthstone, just like in any other game. Your statistics are very well-rounded, considering how big of a power level gap is between Hunter/DH and Shaman/Mage. Really don't know, what you are asking for, if some picks are obviously better than others you are gonna play against them a lot more.
Yet, you still faced the 4 top classes only 60% of time. It's a good result (if you want variance, some would rather face meta decks all the time, because it's easier to prepare the deck for just 4 classes, not for 10, hence this would be a bad result for them).
Is it me or am I not getting a proper variety of opponents? Or did people quit playing some of the classes?
Sometimes I get one class maybe 3 or more times in a row. I added a pic of my HS tracker. This month I started a new deck and played 68 games.
I only played against 3 rogues, 3 warlocks, 4 druids, 4 priests, 6 mages and 7 shamans. 12 hunters, 11 dh, 10 paladins and 8 warriors top the chart.
Did rogue and lock players suddenly stop playing? What about druids and priests?
Not sure I follow. Going by your chart, you had a fairly even looking sort of spread. Obviously the number of games played to verify this here is vastly lower than it needs to be to get a real picture. The act you had at least a few of every class suggests to me that all classes are played? I mean you will always have a higher number of matchups against classes that are currently more popular than others. That's simple logic.
I had to switch to priest as my no minion mage deck was getting dunked on hard by hunters. Also was seeing mostly paladins and DH. Now I get variety, even some meme decks.
Let's do some playing around with numbers: You've played 68 games, and there's 10 classes, so you'd expect about 6.8 games against each class. We know that some classes are more powerful than others, and that influences how often they get played. According to HSReplay the three most powerful classes right now are Hunter, Demon Hunter, and Paladin, which are indeed your top three classes. Fourth (after a massive 2.2% winrate difference) is Warrior, which is also at fourth played, so that adds up, and now we're at 41 of your 68 games. I think it's fairly reasonable to expect the top four classes to make up about two thirds of your games - if anything in most metas it'd probably be the top three or even just two classes.
The other 27 games are split between 6 classes, so you'd roughly about 4.5 games per class. Warlock is showing the worst winrate out of any class, so it's expected it'd see the least play, and as you ascend the classes are mostly ordered by their winrate. Priest is a little out of position, but that's a product of them playing long games - they're queueing up less often because they're spending way longer on each game. The weird exceptions are Rogue, which is the fifth most powerful class being played the least, and Shaman, the second least powerful class being played quite a lot, but even then neither of them is that far off the amount of games you'd expect, so I think it's reasonable to chalk it down do variance and move on.
To be honest I think if anything the classes you've matched up against are pretty diverse - there's been metas where I've played for a whole month without matching up against a single Shaman.
It looks like you did get a good variety of opponents.
I don't know what you were expecting, but "the meta" is always constituted as specific decks (and classes) being more popular than others. And of course, there is some variance involved, especially with the (comparatively) small number of games you are playing.
Normally, I would expect way less variance, with 2 or 3 classes making for 60-70% of my matchups, and some classes not appearing at all. I don't even remember the last time I saw a Hunter in Wild.
I have been playing as Hunter - can it be possible, that my class changes what kind of opponents I get?? That's been a common conspiracy theory, but I think that's an illusion - just the luck of the draw....
Be carefull with what you say, there are some overheated fanboys who don't like these kind of comments.
I think it is not the class you play but the deck you play affects which opponent you will get.
How peculiar.
It seems like every conspiracy theory, even something as trivial as this, needs this element of being an "inconvenient truth" that you are not supposed to talk about, and that some evil overlords would silence those who dare to talk.
You are right, he should be careful. Or else, he could get - can you believe this?! - criticized!!!
But fortunately, he said himself that it's probably just coincidence. That was a close.
Is it me or am I not getting a proper variety of opponents? Or did people quit playing some of the classes?
Sometimes I get one class maybe 3 or more times in a row. I added a pic of my HS tracker. This month I started a new deck and played 68 games.
I only played against 3 rogues, 3 warlocks, 4 druids, 4 priests, 6 mages and 7 shamans. 12 hunters, 11 dh, 10 paladins and 8 warriors top the chart.
Did rogue and lock players suddenly stop playing? What about druids and priests?
Not sure I follow. Going by your chart, you had a fairly even looking sort of spread. Obviously the number of games played to verify this here is vastly lower than it needs to be to get a real picture. The act you had at least a few of every class suggests to me that all classes are played? I mean you will always have a higher number of matchups against classes that are currently more popular than others. That's simple logic.
Indeed. Having played 68 games, he might expect to have played against each class six or seven times - a few a bit less, and a few a bit more. Judging by his deck tracker, that's exactly what happened.
On the other hand, this is the internet, so I guess he might as well complain about it, somehow . . .
Why is it that when I create a non complaint topic some people assume it is a complaint, how sour can you be, jeez. I just wanted to say to my feeling that I was getting 1 opponent more then the others and that I miss playing to other classes. Some good comments and explanations I have seen as well.
I didn't realise people were still struggling against Paladin with so much removal and silence options available?
Possibly the same people who didn't realise how strong Shaman and Mage are against that deck. (Small Spell Mage, in particular, is great against it). Polymorphs and Hexes ruin their game strategy completely.
Just tech in some good board clears / silences and this deck is not a problem anymore. The downside is that you will then find decks like Facehunter becoming difficult matchups (though they are, for pretty much any deck right now)
I have been playing as Hunter - can it be possible, that my class changes what kind of opponents I get?? That's been a common conspiracy theory, but I think that's an illusion - just the luck of the draw....
Be carefull with what you say, there are some overheated fanboys who don't like these kind of comments.
I think it is not the class you play but the deck you play affects which opponent you will get.
sigh... these kind of comments make you really sad. Grand observations with little information.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Is it me or am I not getting a proper variety of opponents? Or did people quit playing some of the classes?
Sometimes I get one class maybe 3 or more times in a row. I added a pic of my HS tracker. This month I started a new deck and played 68 games.
I only played against 3 rogues, 3 warlocks, 4 druids, 4 priests, 6 mages and 7 shamans.
12 hunters, 11 dh, 10 paladins and 8 warriors top the chart.
Did rogue and lock players suddenly stop playing? What about druids and priests?
7 shamans=seems like a weird day all around.
Indeed
Wow, you played all the classes!?!
Ladder is 99% Spike players so tier 1 decks are the only ones played
At regular legend MMR, I haven’t seen a Warlock, Shaman, or Druid in a couple days now. I’ve probably played around 50 games over the past 3 days. I see Priest and Rogue once in awhile. It’s mainly just Face Hunter, Soul DH, Pure Paladin, Bomb Warrior, and Cyclone Mage.
Interesting,
Checked out my own HSReplay chart for this month, and it looks very similar to the OP's ....except.... my Hunter opponents are the smallest at only 3%. (DH and Warriors are the two biggest at 19% each).
I have been playing as Hunter - can it be possible, that my class changes what kind of opponents I get?? That's been a common conspiracy theory, but I think that's an illusion - just the luck of the draw....
Be carefull with what you say, there are some overheated fanboys who don't like these kind of comments.
I think it is not the class you play but the deck you play affects which opponent you will get.
Druid is cancer crap IMO, so I do not play this class. DH is boring, so I very rarely play this class.
EU 11/2015+ , f2p 03/2021+: DK 63 / DH 205 /Dr 277 / Hu 733 / Ma 6666 / Pa 1072 / Pr 1165 / Ro 1791 / Sh 1303 / Wl 707 / Wr 664
This looks like a proper indication of the meta, even too much in favour of less popular classes. Hunter, DH, Pala and Warrior are the most popular classes and you played them the most. But you also played other classes, just rarer. So what's exactly wrong with this chart for you?
You have 8 Warriors, but 7 Shamans, 6 Mages... There is no gap in your statistics, you played a bit against all classes. I mean I don't know what you expected. There are tiers in hearthstone, just like in any other game. Your statistics are very well-rounded, considering how big of a power level gap is between Hunter/DH and Shaman/Mage. Really don't know, what you are asking for, if some picks are obviously better than others you are gonna play against them a lot more.
Yet, you still faced the 4 top classes only 60% of time. It's a good result (if you want variance, some would rather face meta decks all the time, because it's easier to prepare the deck for just 4 classes, not for 10, hence this would be a bad result for them).
Not sure I follow. Going by your chart, you had a fairly even looking sort of spread. Obviously the number of games played to verify this here is vastly lower than it needs to be to get a real picture. The act you had at least a few of every class suggests to me that all classes are played?
I mean you will always have a higher number of matchups against classes that are currently more popular than others. That's simple logic.
I had to switch to priest as my no minion mage deck was getting dunked on hard by hunters. Also was seeing mostly paladins and DH. Now I get variety, even some meme decks.
Let's do some playing around with numbers: You've played 68 games, and there's 10 classes, so you'd expect about 6.8 games against each class. We know that some classes are more powerful than others, and that influences how often they get played. According to HSReplay the three most powerful classes right now are Hunter, Demon Hunter, and Paladin, which are indeed your top three classes. Fourth (after a massive 2.2% winrate difference) is Warrior, which is also at fourth played, so that adds up, and now we're at 41 of your 68 games. I think it's fairly reasonable to expect the top four classes to make up about two thirds of your games - if anything in most metas it'd probably be the top three or even just two classes.
The other 27 games are split between 6 classes, so you'd roughly about 4.5 games per class. Warlock is showing the worst winrate out of any class, so it's expected it'd see the least play, and as you ascend the classes are mostly ordered by their winrate. Priest is a little out of position, but that's a product of them playing long games - they're queueing up less often because they're spending way longer on each game. The weird exceptions are Rogue, which is the fifth most powerful class being played the least, and Shaman, the second least powerful class being played quite a lot, but even then neither of them is that far off the amount of games you'd expect, so I think it's reasonable to chalk it down do variance and move on.
To be honest I think if anything the classes you've matched up against are pretty diverse - there's been metas where I've played for a whole month without matching up against a single Shaman.
It looks like you did get a good variety of opponents.
I don't know what you were expecting, but "the meta" is always constituted as specific decks (and classes) being more popular than others. And of course, there is some variance involved, especially with the (comparatively) small number of games you are playing.
Normally, I would expect way less variance, with 2 or 3 classes making for 60-70% of my matchups, and some classes not appearing at all. I don't even remember the last time I saw a Hunter in Wild.
How peculiar.
It seems like every conspiracy theory, even something as trivial as this, needs this element of being an "inconvenient truth" that you are not supposed to talk about, and that some evil overlords would silence those who dare to talk.
You are right, he should be careful. Or else, he could get - can you believe this?! - criticized!!!
But fortunately, he said himself that it's probably just coincidence. That was a close.
Indeed. Having played 68 games, he might expect to have played against each class six or seven times - a few a bit less, and a few a bit more. Judging by his deck tracker, that's exactly what happened.
On the other hand, this is the internet, so I guess he might as well complain about it, somehow . . .
Why is it that when I create a non complaint topic some people assume it is a complaint, how sour can you be, jeez. I just wanted to say to my feeling that I was getting 1 opponent more then the others and that I miss playing to other classes. Some good comments and explanations I have seen as well.
Peace and thanks for the nice comments!
I don't know if I've played against 7 shamans this entire expansion...
15 games straight only Libram pally (needs boggart and blessing of authority nerf) and face hunters.
I didn't realise people were still struggling against Paladin with so much removal and silence options available?
Possibly the same people who didn't realise how strong Shaman and Mage are against that deck. (Small Spell Mage, in particular, is great against it). Polymorphs and Hexes ruin their game strategy completely.
Just tech in some good board clears / silences and this deck is not a problem anymore. The downside is that you will then find decks like Facehunter becoming difficult matchups (though they are, for pretty much any deck right now)
sigh... these kind of comments make you really sad. Grand observations with little information.