Match up against the same deck over and over again using your same deck over and over again.
Change your deck.
You then no longer match up against that same deck over and over again.
It's been like this for a long time. I don't care if people want to dismiss it as anecdotal evidence. But then they do that and say in the same breath say that MMR is set up to achieve a 50% win rate. That in itself is manipulation AKA rigging.
Why is it whenever this is brought up a bunch of wall defenders feel the need to tell you how wrong you are? I'm not going to waste my time with deck trackers. I have this thing called a memory. How about YOU use a deck tracker. Go ahead, play the same deck say 50 times. Tell me what what happens. Then switch your deck. Play another 50. Tell me what happens. And I won't ask for proof because I would believe you.
You're right it is anecdotal and pseudoscientific. Psychologically speaking those who claim to have bad luck with something usually don't actually have worse luck than anyone else. You're saying you aren't tracking this, just going on feeling. This isn't our experience so If you want to convince us by using a known fallacy as evidence its not going to work.
OK let's break it down for the simple around here.
This isn't about losing. This isn't about bad luck. I never said I was losing. Can you read?
AGAIN FOR THE UMPTEENTH TIME -
If you play the same deck long enough, you will notice a pattern of hitting a counter to that deck repeatedly. If you switch to another deck, you rarely see that counter deck.
Got it now? This isn't difficult. It goes in line with Blizzard wanting a 50% winrate. Duh der Do YoU unDerStand NoW?
You could continue pushing the "I'm so confident that I'm right that I don't need to check, and only stupid people don't believe what strangers tell them online" angle.
And hope that nobody thinks too hard about why you'd go from "ok I'll get some actual numbers to settle the issue" to "I've decided that numbers don't matter" in roughly the amount of time it'd take you to start recording some data.
And that nobody looks at Shed's post.
And then you could claim that anyone who says that's a load of childish nonsense is motivated by.... I dunno exactly. Being such diehard Blizzard fans that we can't bear to hear criticism directed towards our beloved video game developer, I guess. As evidenced by our compulsive and stupid need to employ critical thinking rather than just accepting what you claim. And could check! But refuse to. Because evidence is for dumb-dumbs and big brain types don't question strangers' hunches.
For the record, I thought Diablo 2 was a fantastic game 20 years ago. I was disappointed by Diablo 3, I tried to get into WoW a few times with no success, and the rest of Blizzard's games are in genres I have little to no interest in. I hate the monetization of Hearthstone, hated the monetization of HotS, hated the always-online DRM requirement for D3 and so on. In light of the recent lawsuits they're also not a company I want to support financially for the time being, which is sort of lucky for me because I've been pretty burned out on Hearthstone since around Ashes of Outland.
I could go on but I don't think any of this is relevant. I'm pretty far from being a Blizzard super fan, is what I'm getting at.
Come on dude, we can all see that the emperor's wearing no clothes. It'd be absurd to continue arguing at this point. I certainly don't intend to.
Or you could just play the fucking game with a single deck for about 50 matches, then switch decks to counter decks that give you trouble and count the number of times you face that deck again. I mean it happens to everyone.
Match up against the same deck over and over again using your same deck over and over again.
Change your deck.
You then no longer match up against that same deck over and over again.
It's been like this for a long time. I don't care if people want to dismiss it as anecdotal evidence. But then they do that and say in the same breath say that MMR is set up to achieve a 50% win rate. That in itself is manipulation AKA rigging.
Why is it whenever this is brought up a bunch of wall defenders feel the need to tell you how wrong you are? I'm not going to waste my time with deck trackers. I have this thing called a memory. How about YOU use a deck tracker. Go ahead, play the same deck say 50 times. Tell me what what happens. Then switch your deck. Play another 50. Tell me what happens. And I won't ask for proof because I would believe you.
Well, that settles it. You're totally turning me around on this one. I mean, who needs logic, reason, rationale or coherent thought? All you need is mindless assertions.
Since the start of the expansion I played nothing but Questline Paladin. 5-10 games per day. I saw nothing but Questline Hunter with some other classes sprinkled in.
I switch to another Paladin deck that is control based. I play the same amount of games for a week straight and not one Questline Hunter shows up. Not a single one. Instead, I now see a steady stream of this big Warlock deck.
This has been the case for years. (The most common one is see nothing but Secret Mage, tech in some Eater of Secrets and never see Secret Mage again) It's nothing new. There are many users here who will tell you the same thing. If you don't think the matchmaking is rigged, you're just naive and lack any critical thinking.
Are you running a deck tracker? If so, care to post match-up stats?
How about I've been playing Hearthstone consistently since LoE? This is isn't hard. Anyone with half a brain can see exactly what I'm talking about.
Well, that settles it. You're totally turning me around on this one. I mean, who needs logic, reason, rationale or coherent thought? All you need is mindless assertions.
Since the start of the expansion I played nothing but Questline Paladin. 5-10 games per day. I saw nothing but Questline Hunter with some other classes sprinkled in.
I switch to another Paladin deck that is control based. I play the same amount of games for a week straight and not one Questline Hunter shows up. Not a single one. Instead, I now see a steady stream of this big Warlock deck.
This has been the case for years. (The most common one is see nothing but Secret Mage, tech in some Eater of Secrets and never see Secret Mage again) It's nothing new. There are many users here who will tell you the same thing. If you don't think the matchmaking is rigged, you're just naive and lack any critical thinking.
All the conspiracy theorists really have is anecdotal evidence that amounts to "I have trouble ranking up because I'm bad at the game and don't know it."
It's impossible to be bad at Hearthstone because the game pretty much plays itself. The fanboys keep this delusion that there is some skill required outside of basic math and reading.
Ah, this. Again.
I know that Mark Rosewater (of Magic the Gathering) described his the psychographics slightly differently, but the way I see it, the three core types of game players are:
Timmy, who just wants a cool story out of the game. Basically, his purpose of playing is to be in a Trolden video.
Spike, who takes piloting seriously, and would very much disagree with your claim here.
And lastly, Johnny, who doesn't play the game so much as play the meta. For example, trying to make his own viable deck without copying the netdecks. Of course, because this is very difficult and some Johnnies have some realism, not all Johnnies try this this, but their unifying feature is that they want to beat the game in the deck builder before the match even begins.
Because Johnnies don't believe that piloting is important — at least not compared to deck selection — they have a lot of delusions about what they're doing while piloting, and about the game in general. From a perspective of a Spike, Johnnie might spend almost no time actually playing a game, despite spending hours on it — to apply the concept of Johnnies to ARPGs like Diablo, if you've meticulously planned out more builds than you've actually beaten the game with, your Johnny is showing. (Incidentally, Spikes can sometimes look at Timmies similarly, as some of them spend a lot of time watching Hearthstone games on YouTube or Twitch for the pogginess instead of playing themselves.) This kind of play without playing is where these delusions come from, and is why Rosewater described Johnnies so poorly (being one himself). Very few Johnnies are honest with themselves about how they see the game, yet simultaneously they make up most of the community.
And the most militant of this last group want to tell themselves that there is no such thing as piloting skill, because their bias towards the importance of deck selection is so great that they don't want to admit there is any further experience they're missing out on.
Well, here's the truth about piloting: sometimes, hidden opportunities arise to show your 200 IQ skill, and sometimes the plays are obvious and there's nothing you can do. The gameplay experience isn't consistently one nor the other. Sometimes Johnny is right, but sometimes Spike is right, too.
The people who are consistently on top are constantly on top because they turn around some single digit percentage of games that "normal" players would lose. I happen to know this better than most because I've played LOTS of games of Magic the Gathering with a former US national champion, and at some point playing in person I could finally see he was on another level, something I couldn't fully understand until he (somewhat begrudgingly) broke it down for me — and even then, he thought out in seconds what would take me minutes. That said, for all this mental superiority over me, it basically meant matchups I had a 55% chance to win, he had 60%.
Ultimately, when you're talking about a lot of mental effort to crank out a relatively small reward, what happens is that players only go through the effort if they enjoy the effort in and of itself. If you're the sort of person who would pause a YouTube video with a "find the lethal" puzzle rather than just reveal the solution, for the fun of working it out yourself. And not everyone is that (that's why the delay in those videos is so brief) and that's okay actually.
It's okay to like playing the meta and hate piloting. I'm not trying to say being a Johnny is invalid; I'm just saying it can be tough being honest with yourself about what you're actually doing. If you are honest with yourself, that's cool.
But it's hilariously sour grapes delusional of you to pretend piloting skill doesn't exist.
You like to hear yourself talk, I see.
Me play Paladin quest. Me play 1 cost cards. Me achieve quest. Piloting skill supreme right there.
A dead monkey could play this game and you typing a long-winded post doesn't change that fact.
Love how the tinfoil hat-wearers selectively refute the arguments they think they have answers to, but they consistently fail to address the ironclad ones, such as:
Computing power and programming time required to do this would be so expensive that Blizzard would never recoup the investment.
Blizzard has tried and true psychological gimmicks at their disposal that can do the same task far more efficiently.
Blizzard has far more to lose than to gain if they cheat like this and get caught (and they WOULD get caught).
All the conspiracy theorists really have is anecdotal evidence that amounts to "I have trouble ranking up because I'm bad at the game and don't know it."
It's impossible to be bad at Hearthstone because the game pretty much plays itself. The fanboys keep this delusion that there is some skill required outside of basic math and reading. Please tell me how to outplay decks that give you no chance to counter. I would love to hear your input.
Also, didn't ZTG prove that there is a system in place where the board state can be read? How much computing power would that take?
I don't think the matches themselves are rigged however. But I believe the matchmaking is. I've been playing long enough. You Knights of Hearthstone want actual proof when you know it's impossible to deliver on that promise. I mean how exactly do we obtain such a thing outside of anecdotal evidence? Send an email to Blizzard asking for their algorithms?
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
⚙
Learn More
Cosmetics
Related Cards
Card Pools
✕
×
PopCard Settings
Click on the buttons to change the PopCard background.
Elements settings
Click on the button to hide or unhide popcard elements.
OK let's break it down for the simple around here.
This isn't about losing. This isn't about bad luck. I never said I was losing. Can you read?
AGAIN FOR THE UMPTEENTH TIME -
If you play the same deck long enough, you will notice a pattern of hitting a counter to that deck repeatedly. If you switch to another deck, you rarely see that counter deck.
Got it now? This isn't difficult. It goes in line with Blizzard wanting a 50% winrate. Duh der Do YoU unDerStand NoW?
At the end of the day it doesn't really matter when Hearthstone is a dying piece of shit.
Or you could just play the fucking game with a single deck for about 50 matches, then switch decks to counter decks that give you trouble and count the number of times you face that deck again. I mean it happens to everyone.
Oh boy. You sure got me there. What do I do to counter such a retort from the extreme Blizzard fan?
Nope I lied.
Fine. I'll start using a deck tracker and report my findings. I'll need a couple of days.
Jesus Christ...
Match up against the same deck over and over again using your same deck over and over again.
Change your deck.
You then no longer match up against that same deck over and over again.
It's been like this for a long time. I don't care if people want to dismiss it as anecdotal evidence. But then they do that and say in the same breath say that MMR is set up to achieve a 50% win rate. That in itself is manipulation AKA rigging.
Why is it whenever this is brought up a bunch of wall defenders feel the need to tell you how wrong you are? I'm not going to waste my time with deck trackers. I have this thing called a memory. How about YOU use a deck tracker. Go ahead, play the same deck say 50 times. Tell me what what happens. Then switch your deck. Play another 50. Tell me what happens. And I won't ask for proof because I would believe you.
How about I've been playing Hearthstone consistently since LoE? This is isn't hard. Anyone with half a brain can see exactly what I'm talking about.
Since the start of the expansion I played nothing but Questline Paladin. 5-10 games per day. I saw nothing but Questline Hunter with some other classes sprinkled in.
I switch to another Paladin deck that is control based. I play the same amount of games for a week straight and not one Questline Hunter shows up. Not a single one. Instead, I now see a steady stream of this big Warlock deck.
This has been the case for years. (The most common one is see nothing but Secret Mage, tech in some Eater of Secrets and never see Secret Mage again) It's nothing new. There are many users here who will tell you the same thing. If you don't think the matchmaking is rigged, you're just naive and lack any critical thinking.
Matchmaking is rigged.
You like to hear yourself talk, I see.
Me play Paladin quest. Me play 1 cost cards. Me achieve quest. Piloting skill supreme right there.
A dead monkey could play this game and you typing a long-winded post doesn't change that fact.
It's impossible to be bad at Hearthstone because the game pretty much plays itself. The fanboys keep this delusion that there is some skill required outside of basic math and reading. Please tell me how to outplay decks that give you no chance to counter. I would love to hear your input.
Also, didn't ZTG prove that there is a system in place where the board state can be read? How much computing power would that take?
I don't think the matches themselves are rigged however. But I believe the matchmaking is. I've been playing long enough. You Knights of Hearthstone want actual proof when you know it's impossible to deliver on that promise. I mean how exactly do we obtain such a thing outside of anecdotal evidence? Send an email to Blizzard asking for their algorithms?