The goal is not balance, it is player engagement. That means they want a mediocre player to be able to climb with the same 50 percent win rate that a good player does. That way he can think he is good and keeps playing. They even want to bad players to be able to climb and win half their games. That is why they introduce so much 'weighted RNG' into the game. So they can control the outcomes, maintain player engagement and stimulate spending with progress gates. This is common practice in video games. Blizzard holds patents in the stimulating spending. They acquired KING which is mostly known for making a fake rigged game that stimulates spending.
Hearthstone is rigged, from the matchmaking, to the RNG, to the card draw......if you look into the question on your own, you will reach no other conclusion. On sites like this there are blizzard community managers whose actual job is to make you think this is an actual game and encourage you to spend money on it. Don't be taken in by the shillary.
I have to ask you: why are you chasing those debunked conspiracy theories when how Blizzard is working to achieve their goal of "player engagement" is right there in the open and can't even be argued against?
Have you ever considered the math of bonus stars? Even without calculating it, they ensure that every season, you WILL climb the ladder even with an absolutely abyssmal winrate of 30% or lower, as even at that rate, those stupidly dispropotionately rewarding win-streaks will eventually happen.
And what about lowering the amount of stars to reach legend from 25 to 15? It is a much bigger difference than it seems, and that also rewards bad players more.
Rank floors? Same thing. I went to a website running "reaching legend" simluations, and if you play enough games, you can reach it with a sub-50% winrate. However, if your losing streaks will be canceled out by a rank floor, it will be a lot easier.
There is seriosly no reason to argue that the game itself is rigged. As a Starcraft 2 player, the MMR experience is pretty similar, although how easy it is to reach legend in Hearthstone is nowhere comparable to the difficulty of reaching masters in SC2.
Actually, there are quite some similarities to the SC2 ladder. There, you have 3 very different races, and usually, players are stronger in some matchups than in others. Even so, I have not ever seen mentioned that Blizzard is "rigging" the game to pick your bad matchups. Then, there is the choice of build, which the players do themselves ingame, and there is an extremely complicated metagame where players counter and decieve eachoter. It can be compared to teching and choosing your deck in hearthstone, but if you lose, you should really be mad at yourself and your opponents, not the game.
Regardless of whether you believe match making is rigged, you should agree that the onus to prove it is fair should be on Blizzard, not the players.
In several of the United States, operators of automated gambling machines are required to submit to inspection and provide evidence that these machines provide pure games of chance, without any thumbs on the virtual wheel. Why do we hold Blizzard, a company with a much higher gross income than any casino, to a lower standard?
Blizzard should open their code and data to independent audit, so we can dispell accusations of rigged matchmaking for good.
The goal is not balance, it is player engagement. That means they want a mediocre player to be able to climb with the same 50 percent win rate that a good player does. That way he can think he is good and keeps playing. They even want to bad players to be able to climb and win half their games. That is why they introduce so much 'weighted RNG' into the game. So they can control the outcomes, maintain player engagement and stimulate spending with progress gates. This is common practice in video games. Blizzard holds patents in the stimulating spending. They acquired KING which is mostly known for making a fake rigged game that stimulates spending.
Hearthstone is rigged, from the matchmaking, to the RNG, to the card draw......if you look into the question on your own, you will reach no other conclusion. On sites like this there are blizzard community managers whose actual job is to make you think this is an actual game and encourage you to spend money on it. Don't be taken in by the shillary.
I have to ask you: why are you chasing those debunked conspiracy theories when how Blizzard is working to achieve their goal of "player engagement" is right there in the open and can't even be argued against?
Have you ever considered the math of bonus stars? Even without calculating it, they ensure that every season, you WILL climb the ladder even with an absolutely abyssmal winrate of 30% or lower, as even at that rate, those stupidly dispropotionately rewarding win-streaks will eventually happen.
And what about lowering the amount of stars to reach legend from 25 to 15? It is a much bigger difference than it seems, and that also rewards bad players more.
Rank floors? Same thing. I went to a website running "reaching legend" simluations, and if you play enough games, you can reach it with a sub-50% winrate. However, if your losing streaks will be canceled out by a rank floor, it will be a lot easier.
There is seriosly no reason to argue that the game itself is rigged. As a Starcraft 2 player, the MMR experience is pretty similar, although how easy it is to reach legend in Hearthstone is nowhere comparable to the difficulty of reaching masters in SC2.
Actually, there are quite some similarities to the SC2 ladder. There, you have 3 very different races, and usually, players are stronger in some matchups than in others. Even so, I have not ever seen mentioned that Blizzard is "rigging" the game to pick your bad matchups. Then, there is the choice of build, which the players do themselves ingame, and there is an extremely complicated metagame where players counter and decieve eachoter. It can be compared to teching and choosing your deck in hearthstone, but if you lose, you should really be mad at yourself and your opponents, not the game.
If you did research on blizzard you would find videos all over you tube where they promote the matchmaking rigging in SC as a positive for player engagement.
The goal is not balance, it is player engagement. That means they want a mediocre player to be able to climb with the same 50 percent win rate that a good player does. That way he can think he is good and keeps playing. They even want to bad players to be able to climb and win half their games. That is why they introduce so much 'weighted RNG' into the game. So they can control the outcomes, maintain player engagement and stimulate spending with progress gates. This is common practice in video games. Blizzard holds patents in the stimulating spending. They acquired KING which is mostly known for making a fake rigged game that stimulates spending.
Hearthstone is rigged, from the matchmaking, to the RNG, to the card draw......if you look into the question on your own, you will reach no other conclusion. On sites like this there are blizzard community managers whose actual job is to make you think this is an actual game and encourage you to spend money on it. Don't be taken in by the shillary.
I have to ask you: why are you chasing those debunked conspiracy theories when how Blizzard is working to achieve their goal of "player engagement" is right there in the open and can't even be argued against?
Have you ever considered the math of bonus stars? Even without calculating it, they ensure that every season, you WILL climb the ladder even with an absolutely abyssmal winrate of 30% or lower, as even at that rate, those stupidly dispropotionately rewarding win-streaks will eventually happen.
And what about lowering the amount of stars to reach legend from 25 to 15? It is a much bigger difference than it seems, and that also rewards bad players more.
Rank floors? Same thing. I went to a website running "reaching legend" simluations, and if you play enough games, you can reach it with a sub-50% winrate. However, if your losing streaks will be canceled out by a rank floor, it will be a lot easier.
There is seriosly no reason to argue that the game itself is rigged. As a Starcraft 2 player, the MMR experience is pretty similar, although how easy it is to reach legend in Hearthstone is nowhere comparable to the difficulty of reaching masters in SC2.
Actually, there are quite some similarities to the SC2 ladder. There, you have 3 very different races, and usually, players are stronger in some matchups than in others. Even so, I have not ever seen mentioned that Blizzard is "rigging" the game to pick your bad matchups. Then, there is the choice of build, which the players do themselves ingame, and there is an extremely complicated metagame where players counter and decieve eachoter. It can be compared to teching and choosing your deck in hearthstone, but if you lose, you should really be mad at yourself and your opponents, not the game.
If you did research on blizzard you would find videos all over you tube where they promote the matchmaking rigging in SC as a positive for player engagement.
What? You would have to link videos on that. The playerbase in SC2 is far to small to make rigging even possible in a meaningful way. The top players often have to wait 3mins plus just to get a game reasonably close to their MMR, but the matchmaker still have to resort to awful mismatches of ~1k mmr from time to time. In normal hours and in more populated MMR ranges, this is not an issue, and a top player would plow through those matches with ease, as many have done smurfing.
SC2 players want competetive games, but understand that some times, a good matchup is just not available. I have never heard anybody accuse the matchmaker of prefering "tvz" when that is your weakest matchup and you "need" a loss, for example.
the matches are always rigged if you are a new player, you will fight against players with all powerfull decks if you are an old player, you will fight against new players that use only basic cards played against players that uses FULL basic decks 5 times in a row already
It also could be some one trolling u but whatever.
I do believe there are win/lose streak tranches, where if you get on a streak you get paired up with other players also around that streak level. But it going any deeper than that seems a little too smart for blizzard's matchmaking AI.
Ok, the game isnt rigged, but why in most of cases if you have a win streak, then you have a lose streak, why if you are playing decent games, the next thre games you get awful hands with even being the best player in the world you cant do anything, i understan the first post about the randomness and all of that, but i still dont understan why the game in some point dont let you advance, is like if something create a balance in which you can win certain number of games but then you have to lose certain number of games, i know that this sound absurd, but in my case, and i think that this happens to a lot of people, its a fact, i know that isnt a rule in the game, but i have the theory that like in the life, not all the players can reach legend, even for all the effort that you put. not my case i have reached legend on some ocassions, but i know the frustration of winning and losing not for lack of skill, just for lack of luck
The game IS rigged for a simple reason - the Rock Paper Scissors mechanics. They match rock with paper, then paper with scissors. Matchmaking isn’t random and the entire game is based on this idea to keep win rates for each meta deck at c.50%
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
3nnu1, needs to find a better hobby then going on hearthpwn everyday to fight a war over "is this children's card game rigged?"
I have to ask you: why are you chasing those debunked conspiracy theories when how Blizzard is working to achieve their goal of "player engagement" is right there in the open and can't even be argued against?
Have you ever considered the math of bonus stars? Even without calculating it, they ensure that every season, you WILL climb the ladder even with an absolutely abyssmal winrate of 30% or lower, as even at that rate, those stupidly dispropotionately rewarding win-streaks will eventually happen.
And what about lowering the amount of stars to reach legend from 25 to 15? It is a much bigger difference than it seems, and that also rewards bad players more.
Rank floors? Same thing. I went to a website running "reaching legend" simluations, and if you play enough games, you can reach it with a sub-50% winrate. However, if your losing streaks will be canceled out by a rank floor, it will be a lot easier.
There is seriosly no reason to argue that the game itself is rigged. As a Starcraft 2 player, the MMR experience is pretty similar, although how easy it is to reach legend in Hearthstone is nowhere comparable to the difficulty of reaching masters in SC2.
Actually, there are quite some similarities to the SC2 ladder. There, you have 3 very different races, and usually, players are stronger in some matchups than in others. Even so, I have not ever seen mentioned that Blizzard is "rigging" the game to pick your bad matchups. Then, there is the choice of build, which the players do themselves ingame, and there is an extremely complicated metagame where players counter and decieve eachoter. It can be compared to teching and choosing your deck in hearthstone, but if you lose, you should really be mad at yourself and your opponents, not the game.
Editor of the Heartpwn Legendary Crafting Guide:
https://www.hearthpwn.com/forums/hearthstone-general/card-discussion/205920-legendary-tier-list-crafting-guide
Regardless of whether you believe match making is rigged, you should agree that the onus to prove it is fair should be on Blizzard, not the players.
In several of the United States, operators of automated gambling machines are required to submit to inspection and provide evidence that these machines provide pure games of chance, without any thumbs on the virtual wheel. Why do we hold Blizzard, a company with a much higher gross income than any casino, to a lower standard?
Blizzard should open their code and data to independent audit, so we can dispell accusations of rigged matchmaking for good.
This might be the funniest thing I've read in a while on the internet.
If you did research on blizzard you would find videos all over you tube where they promote the matchmaking rigging in SC as a positive for player engagement.
https://my.clevelandclinic.org/health/diseases/9599-delusional-disorder
For those who suffer from unconditionally unfounded trust in Blizzard not rigging the game:
https://psychology.stackexchange.com/questions/20115/is-there-a-mental-condition-that-makes-people-unconditionally-gullible
We make our world significant through the courage of our questions and the depth of our answers.
https://www.google.com/search?q=is there a mental illness in thinking you are right all the time&oq=is there a mental illness in thinking you are right all the time&aqs=chrome..69i57.17052j0j7&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8
What? You would have to link videos on that. The playerbase in SC2 is far to small to make rigging even possible in a meaningful way. The top players often have to wait 3mins plus just to get a game reasonably close to their MMR, but the matchmaker still have to resort to awful mismatches of ~1k mmr from time to time. In normal hours and in more populated MMR ranges, this is not an issue, and a top player would plow through those matches with ease, as many have done smurfing.
SC2 players want competetive games, but understand that some times, a good matchup is just not available. I have never heard anybody accuse the matchmaker of prefering "tvz" when that is your weakest matchup and you "need" a loss, for example.
Editor of the Heartpwn Legendary Crafting Guide:
https://www.hearthpwn.com/forums/hearthstone-general/card-discussion/205920-legendary-tier-list-crafting-guide
Players will do literally anything but get better at this game.
It also could be some one trolling u but whatever.
TL/DR skill cap
I do believe there are win/lose streak tranches, where if you get on a streak you get paired up with other players also around that streak level. But it going any deeper than that seems a little too smart for blizzard's matchmaking AI.
Ok, the game isnt rigged, but why in most of cases if you have a win streak, then you have a lose streak, why if you are playing decent games, the next thre games you get awful hands with even being the best player in the world you cant do anything, i understan the first post about the randomness and all of that, but i still dont understan why the game in some point dont let you advance, is like if something create a balance in which you can win certain number of games but then you have to lose certain number of games, i know that this sound absurd, but in my case, and i think that this happens to a lot of people, its a fact, i know that isnt a rule in the game, but i have the theory that like in the life, not all the players can reach legend, even for all the effort that you put. not my case i have reached legend on some ocassions, but i know the frustration of winning and losing not for lack of skill, just for lack of luck
The game IS rigged for a simple reason - the Rock Paper Scissors mechanics.
They match rock with paper, then paper with scissors. Matchmaking isn’t random and the entire game is based on this idea to keep win rates for each meta deck at c.50%