I'd say Hearthstone is like 20-30% skill, the rest is luck and the quality of your deck.
It can't really be defined in a skill percentage, rather in winrate.
Being the absolute perfect player in games like Rocket League, shooters or MOBA's will give you something like a 95% winrate.
Being the absolute perfect player in Hearthstone will give you something like a 60-70% winrate. In other words, there's a good chance you'll lose a $100.000 tournament final to somebody who is worse than you but got lucky.
I'd say Hearthstone is like 20-30% skill, the rest is luck and the quality of your deck.
Yep. And in this meta t2 keleseth t5 cobalt scalebane t7 bonemare t8/t10 dk, that's more 10-20%
Why do people say things like this? Like, where does the 20 to 30 percent figure even come from? You pull it out your arse, that's what. It doesn't make any sense, nor does it make you sound clever. If by skill you mean knowledge of the game then what you actually mean is the game is near totally dependent on skill but once players reach a certain level of game understanding luck is often the deciding factor in matches. Proof? Give someone who doesn't know how to play or understand any of the games concepts (I.e. a brand new player) a tier 1 deck he will lose game after game after game.
I'd say Hearthstone is like 20-30% skill, the rest is luck and the quality of your deck.
Yep. And in this meta t2 keleseth t5 cobalt scalebane t7 bonemare t8/t10 dk, that's more 10-20%
Why do people say things like this? Like, where does the 20 to 30 percent figure even come from? You pull it out your arse, that's what. It doesn't make any sense, nor does it make you sound clever. If by skill you mean knowledge of the game then what you actually mean is the game is near totally dependent on skill but once players reach a certain level of game understanding luck is often the deciding factor in matches. Proof? Give someone who doesn't know how to play or understand any of the games concepts (I.e. a brand new player) a tier 1 deck he will lose game after game after game.
To play something on curve, dragging it on the screen and lowering the enemy HP to 0 isn't exactly skill.
Poker is the same as Hearthstone, OMG he just needs the 7 of hearts to win 13mil anything else and he's lost OW OMG HE ACTUALLY GOT IT!!! That is not skill that is pure luck lol but poker does take skill to be good just like in Hearthstone.
I'd say Hearthstone is like 20-30% skill, the rest is luck and the quality of your deck.
Yep. And in this meta t2 keleseth t5 cobalt scalebane t7 bonemare t8/t10 dk, that's more 10-20%
Why do people say things like this? Like, where does the 20 to 30 percent figure even come from? You pull it out your arse, that's what. It doesn't make any sense, nor does it make you sound clever. If by skill you mean knowledge of the game then what you actually mean is the game is near totally dependent on skill but once players reach a certain level of game understanding luck is often the deciding factor in matches. Proof? Give someone who doesn't know how to play or understand any of the games concepts (I.e. a brand new player) a tier 1 deck he will lose game after game after game.
This is just a rough estimate of course, I usually get Rank 3 or higher as a Free To Play player, and I would say a good 70% of my losses and wins are because of Luck or Misfortune. Very rarely do I feel like I just completely outplayed my opponent or my opponent outplayed me.
I think when it comes to the very top HS players in tournaments, they know the matches so well and how to win them a lot of it comes down to luck, just based on the fact they're playing at such a high level. But for most people I'd say there is a lot of skill involved in Hearthstone so I don't get why people have to downplay it so much.
Oh it's easy, you just draw Keleseth on curve. Oh, draw Raza and Anduin on curve. Yeah, well what about the majority of games where that doesn't happen? There is a reason why pros make it to high Legend on a monthly basis and other people get stuck at rank 15. Those people who do get stuck also tend to blame luck as their shortcoming and not actually making mistakes and bad decisions.
Annnnnnnd some people still don't understand the skill behind gaming probability and decision making based on that.
Hearthstone requires less skill than a game like poker though. In a poker tournament, you only need to have a decent hand once every now and then (and on the final hand). You lie and cheat and play what your opponent has 90% of the game. Hearthstone does not have that luxury; you can't bluff your hand into being better than it is. Sure, sometimes at higher levels of play you see people out think themselves trying to play around something the opponent doesn't have in-hand yet (and on streams, something the opponent might not even have in their deck) , but those situations are few and far between. There's very little posturing in competitive Hearthstone; you have to play cards or you will lose. Poker players can play people and the opponent rather than what they were dealt, and that's just not a really big dimension of Hearthstone.
Poker is the same as Hearthstone, OMG he just needs the 7 of hearts to win 13mil anything else and he's lost OW OMG HE ACTUALLY GOT IT!!! That is not skill that is pure luck lol but poker does take skill to be good just like in Hearthstone.
A very good poker player can still win most games by bluffing even when he gets the worst possible cards.
A very good HS player has nearly no chance at winning when he gets the worst possible cards (like getting only high cost cards in the first 5 turns or not drawing your combo cards).
As long as the same rules and RNG apply to all players, it is still fair. There are so many different types of Tournament Modes already which require you to strategically overthink your setup, counter play certain decks. whatever.
As long as there are watchers, for me it feels legit to have competitive tournaments.
I'd say Hearthstone is like 20-30% skill, the rest is luck and the quality of your deck.
It can't really be defined in a skill percentage, rather in winrate.
Being the absolute perfect player in games like Rocket League, shooters or MOBA's will give you something like a 95% winrate.
Being the absolute perfect player in Hearthstone will give you something like a 60-70% winrate. In other words, there's a good chance you'll lose a $100.000 tournament final to somebody who is worse than you but got lucky.
Poker is the same as Hearthstone, OMG he just needs the 7 of hearts to win 13mil anything else and he's lost OW OMG HE ACTUALLY GOT IT!!! That is not skill that is pure luck lol but poker does take skill to be good just like in Hearthstone.
no its not poker is about reading what your opponent have and has an element of counting what cards left
People keep using the same argument over and over again to defend HS as an e-sport:
"Oh, sure, you can win games where you play like shit because you drew well or because your deck happens to be good against your opponent's over 80% of the time, but if you play well you will win more games in the long run"
What you fail to realize is that this could easily be extended to almost any game that has luck involved, even going to moronic proportions. You could make the case that Dice Poker could become a competitive sport/board game because the player who is more experienced at rolling the dice will be more likely to get the combinations he needs on any given turn. You could even make the same case for flipping a fucking coin, and it would still check out. As long as 1% of the game depended on skill, you could still influence the results somewhat by getting better.
Now obviously "luck" is a factor on any game, even actual competitive games like CS and LoL do have a luck factor inherent to them.
Well where do we draw the line then? I say the place where you draw the line should be when HS world champions of previous years can't even come close to qualifying for the following year's WC.
Poker is the same as Hearthstone, OMG he just needs the 7 of hearts to win 13mil anything else and he's lost OW OMG HE ACTUALLY GOT IT!!! That is not skill that is pure luck lol but poker does take skill to be good just like in Hearthstone.
no its not poker is about reading what your opponent have and has an element of counting what cards left
I think the Poker comparison is fair, especially regarding how inconsistantly the players perform. I have not followed poker for a while, but when I did, there were always some online-geek who had played for a year or less hitting final tables in major tournaments, while seasoned champions were knocked out in the early stages.
I am happy there is an esport scene, and I enjoy watching it and listening how the commentators discuss decktech and various playchoices. Some times, I am very impressed by the players too, especially how some seem to accurately read their opponent's hand, and play acordingly.
We all know there is a lot of luck involved, even in choosing your lineup and deckbuilding, as you can only assume what your opponents will bring. A sideboard would probably make things slightly better.
Around 0:30
He's right ya know. But some utter idiots just don't get it. It doesn't take any skill to win a tournament.
I'd say Hearthstone is like 20-30% skill, the rest is luck and the quality of your deck.
Dont forget t4-5 raza t7-8 anduin, that takes tons of skill.
Plus T10 valen + Mind Blast + Holy Smite
Poker is the same as Hearthstone, OMG he just needs the 7 of hearts to win 13mil anything else and he's lost OW OMG HE ACTUALLY GOT IT!!! That is not skill that is pure luck lol but poker does take skill to be good just like in Hearthstone.
I think when it comes to the very top HS players in tournaments, they know the matches so well and how to win them a lot of it comes down to luck, just based on the fact they're playing at such a high level. But for most people I'd say there is a lot of skill involved in Hearthstone so I don't get why people have to downplay it so much.
Oh it's easy, you just draw Keleseth on curve. Oh, draw Raza and Anduin on curve. Yeah, well what about the majority of games where that doesn't happen? There is a reason why pros make it to high Legend on a monthly basis and other people get stuck at rank 15. Those people who do get stuck also tend to blame luck as their shortcoming and not actually making mistakes and bad decisions.
Annnnnnnd some people still don't understand the skill behind gaming probability and decision making based on that.
Hearthstone requires less skill than a game like poker though. In a poker tournament, you only need to have a decent hand once every now and then (and on the final hand). You lie and cheat and play what your opponent has 90% of the game. Hearthstone does not have that luxury; you can't bluff your hand into being better than it is. Sure, sometimes at higher levels of play you see people out think themselves trying to play around something the opponent doesn't have in-hand yet (and on streams, something the opponent might not even have in their deck) , but those situations are few and far between. There's very little posturing in competitive Hearthstone; you have to play cards or you will lose. Poker players can play people and the opponent rather than what they were dealt, and that's just not a really big dimension of Hearthstone.
As long as the same rules and RNG apply to all players, it is still fair. There are so many different types of Tournament Modes already which require you to strategically overthink your setup, counter play certain decks. whatever.
As long as there are watchers, for me it feels legit to have competitive tournaments.
People keep using the same argument over and over again to defend HS as an e-sport:
"Oh, sure, you can win games where you play like shit because you drew well or because your deck happens to be good against your opponent's over 80% of the time, but if you play well you will win more games in the long run"
What you fail to realize is that this could easily be extended to almost any game that has luck involved, even going to moronic proportions. You could make the case that Dice Poker could become a competitive sport/board game because the player who is more experienced at rolling the dice will be more likely to get the combinations he needs on any given turn. You could even make the same case for flipping a fucking coin, and it would still check out. As long as 1% of the game depended on skill, you could still influence the results somewhat by getting better.
Now obviously "luck" is a factor on any game, even actual competitive games like CS and LoL do have a luck factor inherent to them.
Well where do we draw the line then? I say the place where you draw the line should be when HS world champions of previous years can't even come close to qualifying for the following year's WC.
We all know there is a lot of luck involved, even in choosing your lineup and deckbuilding, as you can only assume what your opponents will bring. A sideboard would probably make things slightly better.
Editor of the Heartpwn Legendary Crafting Guide:
https://www.hearthpwn.com/forums/hearthstone-general/card-discussion/205920-legendary-tier-list-crafting-guide