It's funny how the reality deniers always fall back on the same tired excuses.
Uh, you have confirmation bias. Which is a classic gaslighting technique that is use by con men of all ilks. Basically the argument is. You see that reality that is right in front of you, you are too stupid to know it is not real. Which is quite effective, especially with younger people who fear being perceived as different or dumb and are very sensitive to the criticism of their peers. This makes manipulating them way too easy.
But my very favorite is when they start in with burden of proof. That is language from court proceedings which is tied to two meanings, preponderance of evidence and beyond a reasonable doubt. Most lay people only think of beyond a reasonable doubt which is actually quite a difficult burden to make. I mean a guy has to be really guilty with a lot of strong evidence to overcome a reasonable doubt which a decent atty can generate.
So just in life, remember when someone goes to Burden of Proof to defend their position. What they usually mean is you are right but I can still deny it, nyaah, nyaah, nyaah.
But if you look at Blizzard/Activision...it is very hard to look at them as some moral group that would never engage in shenanigans to make money. I think their track record in the last decade speaks for itself. If you read through the other zephry;s thread I linked you will see many of the same arguments as this one, there is another good thread on this too, but I am bit too lazy to dig it up. But one thing to keep in mind is that Activision acquired King, which is notorious for manipulative controlled gameplay designed to cause frustration in their users to get them to spend. King also generates a bazillion dollars because that shit works. It is ridiculous to think that blizzard would not engage in similar tactics in this game.
Who pays to do this? No one would spend that much time on nonsense without getting paid by someone. Well I guess you could be unemployed and this is just what you fill the hole in your life with.
It's funny how the reality deniers always fall back on the same tired excuses.
Uh, you have confirmation bias. Which is a classic gaslighting technique that is use by con men of all ilks. Basically the argument is. You see that reality that is right in front of you, you are too stupid to know it is not real. Which is quite effective, especially with younger people who fear being perceived as different or dumb and are very sensitive to the criticism of their peers. This makes manipulating them way too easy.
But my very favorite is when they start in with burden of proof. That is language from court proceedings which is tied to two meanings, preponderance of evidence and beyond a reasonable doubt. Most lay people only think of beyond a reasonable doubt which is actually quite a difficult burden to make. I mean a guy has to be really guilty with a lot of strong evidence to overcome a reasonable doubt which a decent atty can generate.
So just in life, remember when someone goes to Burden of Proof to defend their position. What they usually mean is you are right but I can still deny it, nyaah, nyaah, nyaah.
But if you look at Blizzard/Activision...it is very hard to look at them as some moral group that would never engage in shenanigans to make money. I think their track record in the last decade speaks for itself. If you read through the other zephry;s thread I linked you will see many of the same arguments as this one, there is another good thread on this too, but I am bit too lazy to dig it up. But one thing to keep in mind is that Activision acquired King, which is notorious for manipulative controlled gameplay designed to cause frustration in their users to get them to spend. King also generates a bazillion dollars because that shit works. It is ridiculous to think that blizzard would not engage in similar tactics in this game.
Who pays to do this? No one would spend that much time on nonsense without getting paid by someone. Well I guess you could be unemployed and this is just what you fill the hole in your life with.
Oh I forgot the most common tactic, 'shoot the messenger' . If you cannot argue against a person's points, just go at them.
if you read my first post in the zephrys thread, you will understand my motivation.
So just in life, remember when someone goes to Burden of Proof to defend their position. What they usually mean is you are right but I can still deny it, nyaah, nyaah, nyaah.
It is good to see that you feel so defensive about the Burden of Proof, even if you have deluded yourself about the intent of those throwing the term around. In my experience, the conversation usually goes thus:
Person 1: "This is a thing!" Person 2: "Can you prove that it is a thing?" P1: "Can you prove it is NOT a thing?" P2 "Burden of Proof!" Yada yada. It isn't being used to defend a position, it is being used to remind you that your the one making a claim and they would like you to back it up. Typically page one or two of a thousand post thread.
Burden of Proof isn't just a court of law thing either. Seriously, read the Wikipedia page Burden of Proof (Philosophy), it is a much more interesting read than the law one (personal opinion).
But then again, this threads are always a source of amusement for me in a similar vein as the salt thread, so thanks! Keep it up.
So just in life, remember when someone goes to Burden of Proof to defend their position. What they usually mean is you are right but I can still deny it, nyaah, nyaah, nyaah.
It is good to see that you feel so defensive about the Burden of Proof, even if you have deluded yourself about the intent of those throwing the term around. In my experience, the conversation usually goes thus:
Person 1: "This is a thing!" Person 2: "Can you prove that it is a thing?" P1: "Can you prove it is NOT a thing?" P2 "Burden of Proof!" Yada yada. It isn't being used to defend a position, it is being used to remind you that your the one making a claim and they would like you to back it up. Typically page one or two of a thousand post thread.
Burden of Proof isn't just a court of law thing either. Seriously, read the Wikipedia page Burden of Proof (Philosophy), it is a much more interesting read than the law one (personal opinion).
But then again, this threads are always a source of amusement for me in a similar vein as the salt thread, so thanks! Keep it up.
It's funny how the reality deniers always fall back on the same tired excuses.
Uh, you have confirmation bias. Which is a classic gaslighting technique that is use by con men of all ilks. Basically the argument is. You see that reality that is right in front of you, you are too stupid to know it is not real. Which is quite effective, especially with younger people who fear being perceived as different or dumb and are very sensitive to the criticism of their peers. This makes manipulating them way too easy.
But my very favorite is when they start in with burden of proof. That is language from court proceedings which is tied to two meanings, preponderance of evidence and beyond a reasonable doubt. Most lay people only think of beyond a reasonable doubt which is actually quite a difficult burden to make. I mean a guy has to be really guilty with a lot of strong evidence to overcome a reasonable doubt which a decent atty can generate.
So just in life, remember when someone goes to Burden of Proof to defend their position. What they usually mean is you are right but I can still deny it, nyaah, nyaah, nyaah.
But if you look at Blizzard/Activision...it is very hard to look at them as some moral group that would never engage in shenanigans to make money. I think their track record in the last decade speaks for itself. If you read through the other zephry;s thread I linked you will see many of the same arguments as this one, there is another good thread on this too, but I am bit too lazy to dig it up. But one thing to keep in mind is that Activision acquired King, which is notorious for manipulative controlled gameplay designed to cause frustration in their users to get them to spend. King also generates a bazillion dollars because that shit works. It is ridiculous to think that blizzard would not engage in similar tactics in this game.
Who pays to do this? No one would spend that much time on nonsense without getting paid by someone. Well I guess you could be unemployed and this is just what you fill the hole in your life with.
Oh I forgot the most common tactic, 'shoot the messenger' . If you cannot argue against a person's points, just go at them.
if you read my first post in the zephrys thread, you will understand my motivation.
Answer the question homie. Who is paying you? No once acts like this without some financial reason.
Answer the question homie. Who is paying you? No once acts like this without some financial reason.
"Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity." -Hanlon's Razor
The quote isn't particularly apt in this scenario since performing an act with the expectation of financial compensation is far more attributable to greed than malice or stupidity, but I do see that you're making an effort, lol. In all seriousness, I wouldn't reject his premise so readily and with such disdain if I were in your position. At the very least, a patent was cited earlier in this thread that suggests that Activision Blizzards matchmaking algorithm has the capacity to arrange matchmaking in such a way that players are incentivized to purchase in game items via microtransactions. Here is the patent in question: https://patents.google.com/patent/US20160005270
Indeed. I have read that patent far more times than I would have ever cared too. But it is the massive leap in logic I see when people go from "There exist a patent that Blizzard could invoke to mess with matchmaking." to "BIG BROTHER BLIZZARD CONTROLS EVERYTHING FROM THE FIRST DRAW TO THE TOP DECK LETHAL AND YOU DON'T THINK SO YOU MUST BE STOOPID!!1!" that typically makes my eyes roll right from my head.
I think my favourite rants and reasons for why the game is rigged is "well why do the best players always end up at the top??" Whether they be talking about constructed, BGs, Arena, etc. Like it isn't even a possibility that the person ranting has hit their skill ceiling and is just not going to improve unless they learn how to. Nope, can't be that, the game must be rigged against them!
Indeed. I have read that patent far more times than I would have ever cared too. But it is the massive leap in logic I see when people go from "There exist a patent that Blizzard could invoke to mess with matchmaking." to "BIG BROTHER BLIZZARD CONTROLS EVERYTHING FROM THE FIRST DRAW TO THE TOP DECK LETHAL AND YOU DON'T THINK SO YOU MUST BE STOOPID!!1!" that typically makes my eyes roll right from my head.
This is fair. I think it's important, particularly in discussions like these, to retain a sense of perspective. There is a middle ground here in which Blizzard does manipulate matchmaking to a certain unknown degree without necessarily engineering every aspect of how every match plays out
Game isn't rigged. But the reason why the same people get top legend every month and continue playing in masters is because this game is their job. They literally play this game 10+ hours a day, EVERY SINGLE DAY! When you have this amount of time to do one thing, you're going to get good at it and the odds will be in your favor that you will eventually get high legend out of it. Just copy a tier1 deck and with enough games you're there.
So you think that a multibillion dollar corporation would not use a patent that they own which is designed to generate revenue in hearthstone. Is that correct?
No. i think there is nothing in the patent about adjusting a players win/loss ratio.
Also, the patent, as is, would not work on Hearthstone, because it could be very easily spotted and then manipulated by players. If this patent was in use on Hearthstone then i could simply refrain from crafting the cards that my deck counters and then face my good matchups more than the bad ones, because the game would be attempting to advertise the cards i would be missing.
There are several sites and applications gathering stats from thousands of played games and analyzing them card by card. Has any of them ever noticed anything like what you believe exists in the game? Has any site ever found one deck to face another more often than it's presense in the metagame, or subpar decks with missing cards facing the mirror match more than others?
"The game is rigged" is just a disguise for "I am unwilling to accept that i am just bad, therefore i will never be able to improve".
The amount of dick swinging over a children’s card game in this thread is brilliant. Some of you lads really need to get something more important to worry about.
So this really isn't 100% on topic, but i'd like to offer up an observation.
I haven't logged my tracking, but for a long time I've had suspicion that people were somehow able to adjust their draw consistency based on some means, and over time I tested different ways and theories... what i've noticed as a pattern is this:
If you switch out a particular card from your deck - there is a higher percentage chance that the card you swapped in will be drawn in your opening hand of the next game. Mind you, I'm not saying a guarantee, but even if you just alter your deck by one card, that one card now has some higher percentage possibility of being drawn the very next game.
You can call it RNG, but a 1 in 30 chance of a card being drawn in opening hand of next game is typical for a singleton - over the course of 10 games and 10 changes, that 1 card change appeared for me close to 25% of the time. No outside tools/addons are used other than HDT. I'm curious to see if anyone has ever tested or noticed the same.
Threads like these are fascinating to me. I guess you can say that anything that deviates from truly random is rigging the game. Although that statement doesn't add value to the argument or the game.
I think it's fair to say that the game has a matchmaking system that tries to find you a "Worthy Opponent". Is that detrimental? I think not. Especially since there is no evidence it does it based on cards or decks. It's just a normal matchmaking system. Does it feel bad when you are higher up than you actually should be and you get your ass handed to you? Yea, but that's just part of finding your equilibrium.
People here are just ill equipped mentally to find their own faults in their play or deck. If it worked for so and so, why not me? because you are a human going up against another human who makes decisions and has creative thoughts. But it didn't follow the exact percentages I was told. Yea because those are based on huge sample sizes. You will see far more variation in your games than the stats show. Fact of the matter is that what you see is variation in how people see things and make decisions based on them. No one plays exactly the same way and there is always room for creativity and ingenuity which is what humans are good at. Adaptation to a meta is a sign of ingenuity not rigging.
I'd also like someone to respond to the HSReplay stuff. Seriously, any rigging would show up in their stats somewhere. The only answer I've seen is that they are not analyzing it correctly lol. That's not how data analysis works.
Here's my conspiracy theory. There are people that get paid by competitors to come here and try to get people to think Hearthstone is rigged and the developers are pure evil. I find it hard to believe people would troll so hard without getting paid.
This :D In the future i will just assume everyone making some outrageous claims about Hearthstone being rigged is a mad artifact developer !
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Who pays to do this? No one would spend that much time on nonsense without getting paid by someone. Well I guess you could be unemployed and this is just what you fill the hole in your life with.
Oh I forgot the most common tactic, 'shoot the messenger' . If you cannot argue against a person's points, just go at them.
if you read my first post in the zephrys thread, you will understand my motivation.
It is good to see that you feel so defensive about the Burden of Proof, even if you have deluded yourself about the intent of those throwing the term around. In my experience, the conversation usually goes thus:
Person 1: "This is a thing!" Person 2: "Can you prove that it is a thing?" P1: "Can you prove it is NOT a thing?" P2 "Burden of Proof!" Yada yada. It isn't being used to defend a position, it is being used to remind you that your the one making a claim and they would like you to back it up. Typically page one or two of a thousand post thread.
Burden of Proof isn't just a court of law thing either. Seriously, read the Wikipedia page Burden of Proof (Philosophy), it is a much more interesting read than the law one (personal opinion).
But then again, this threads are always a source of amusement for me in a similar vein as the salt thread, so thanks! Keep it up.
I love the way you project your defensiveness
Answer the question homie. Who is paying you? No once acts like this without some financial reason.
And I love your salt! It goes so very well with my popcorn, and I should thank you for producing so much. :D
"Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity." -Hanlon's Razor
The quote isn't particularly apt in this scenario since performing an act with the expectation of financial compensation is far more attributable to greed than malice or stupidity, but I do see that you're making an effort, lol. In all seriousness, I wouldn't reject his premise so readily and with such disdain if I were in your position. At the very least, a patent was cited earlier in this thread that suggests that Activision Blizzards matchmaking algorithm has the capacity to arrange matchmaking in such a way that players are incentivized to purchase in game items via microtransactions. Here is the patent in question: https://patents.google.com/patent/US20160005270
thanks for reiterating my point, if you can't counter the message, then attack the messenger.
Indeed. I have read that patent far more times than I would have ever cared too. But it is the massive leap in logic I see when people go from "There exist a patent that Blizzard could invoke to mess with matchmaking." to "BIG BROTHER BLIZZARD CONTROLS EVERYTHING FROM THE FIRST DRAW TO THE TOP DECK LETHAL AND YOU DON'T THINK SO YOU MUST BE STOOPID!!1!" that typically makes my eyes roll right from my head.
I think my favourite rants and reasons for why the game is rigged is "well why do the best players always end up at the top??" Whether they be talking about constructed, BGs, Arena, etc. Like it isn't even a possibility that the person ranting has hit their skill ceiling and is just not going to improve unless they learn how to. Nope, can't be that, the game must be rigged against them!
People are just bad losers lol
This is fair. I think it's important, particularly in discussions like these, to retain a sense of perspective. There is a middle ground here in which Blizzard does manipulate matchmaking to a certain unknown degree without necessarily engineering every aspect of how every match plays out
Sounds like a few people dropped out of law school to size up ego's over a thread about Hearthstone....
:)
https://hsreplay.net/replay/27u2NJTZZJgToJ6k6n5BTM
Game isn't rigged. But the reason why the same people get top legend every month and continue playing in masters is because this game is their job. They literally play this game 10+ hours a day, EVERY SINGLE DAY! When you have this amount of time to do one thing, you're going to get good at it and the odds will be in your favor that you will eventually get high legend out of it. Just copy a tier1 deck and with enough games you're there.
Reminder to people to keep discussions on the topic and not on eachother. Stay constructive.
If you see a bad post on the forum use the report function under it, so I or someone else of the moderation team can take care of it!
No. i think there is nothing in the patent about adjusting a players win/loss ratio.
Also, the patent, as is, would not work on Hearthstone, because it could be very easily spotted and then manipulated by players. If this patent was in use on Hearthstone then i could simply refrain from crafting the cards that my deck counters and then face my good matchups more than the bad ones, because the game would be attempting to advertise the cards i would be missing.
There are several sites and applications gathering stats from thousands of played games and analyzing them card by card. Has any of them ever noticed anything like what you believe exists in the game? Has any site ever found one deck to face another more often than it's presense in the metagame, or subpar decks with missing cards facing the mirror match more than others?
"The game is rigged" is just a disguise for "I am unwilling to accept that i am just bad, therefore i will never be able to improve".
The amount of dick swinging over a children’s card game in this thread is brilliant. Some of you lads really need to get something more important to worry about.
So this really isn't 100% on topic, but i'd like to offer up an observation.
I haven't logged my tracking, but for a long time I've had suspicion that people were somehow able to adjust their draw consistency based on some means, and over time I tested different ways and theories... what i've noticed as a pattern is this:
If you switch out a particular card from your deck - there is a higher percentage chance that the card you swapped in will be drawn in your opening hand of the next game. Mind you, I'm not saying a guarantee, but even if you just alter your deck by one card, that one card now has some higher percentage possibility of being drawn the very next game.
You can call it RNG, but a 1 in 30 chance of a card being drawn in opening hand of next game is typical for a singleton - over the course of 10 games and 10 changes, that 1 card change appeared for me close to 25% of the time. No outside tools/addons are used other than HDT. I'm curious to see if anyone has ever tested or noticed the same.
This :D In the future i will just assume everyone making some outrageous claims about Hearthstone being rigged is a mad artifact developer !