-
- Kinkyjohnfowler
- Registered User
-
Member for 3 years, 5 months, and 4 days
Last active Sun, Aug, 21 2022 16:57:17 -
- 1
- 2
- 12
- 0 Followers
- 343 Total Posts
- 299 Thanks
⚙
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.
1
Your patter is so shit, man.
0
How am I 'trolling', like do you even know the meaning of the word? Because the context in which you're using it isn't correct at all. What you've said has absolutely no relevancy to how this 'debate' came about.
I responded to Evil B because he quoted my post to pester me with his inane drivel, which he does with people all of the time. I would never come into this thread and troll anyone who is venting about anything, be that unlucky RNG or accusations of rigging, but if somebody quotes me, then yes I might respond.
And I never brought data into this conversation either so no clue where you've pulled that from, that was Evil B... Next time you want to spout off I'd highly recommend actually trying to understand what's going on before hand.
0
The animation suggests the card is drawn before the tradable card goes into the deck.
The tooltip is contradictory to that (and itself), it states that you drag the tradable card into your deck to draw a new card. So the card would be in the deck before the new card is drawn but then again it states "new card".
My guess is that it doesn't draw itself, however this combo would not work as the fatigue draw would happen before the card is in the deck, so you would redraw the card next turn.
0
Yeah, I haven't played the game in a little while but honestly from what I've seen of this set so far it's moving in a really good direction. If early game tempo is tamed then the game could be in a really good spot as player options can really open up with cards like these and the new Questlines.
It's weird why they opened the year with such a bland expansion. I thought the design team just had no idea what they were doing after Barrens but then they release this stuff, I honestly don't get it lol.
8
It's Hearthstone's answer to a sideboard. The issue with something like an Ooze is that it's just a pretty bad card if your opponent doesn't run weapons, so this allows you to cycle for something that may be more useful in the matchup.
It's a positive step forwards for the game imo, it makes tech choices easier to justify and mitigates the bad feeling of playing against decks where some of your cards are basically dead.
4
As you clearly lack the mental capacity to engage in an adult conversation I cannot imagine what I'm about to say will have that much of an effect on you. Your failure to understand basic concepts, your awful attempts at being ‘funny’, and your bewildering hypocrisy are just too much. Sorry. In any case this post isn’t for ‘you’, it’s directed at you, but it is intended to be read by those with an IQ higher than that of a rabbit. This may be too long for you, you may not ‘give a shit about me’ and in turn pretend not to read it, but that’s fine. This is an open forum... Am I being condescending enough for you? (That question was rhetorical [google it]; I’ll rise back up from your level now).
If it really helps you enjoy the game to hang on to the idea that Blizzard is only out to create a 100% fair and random game for your entertainment then again I say more power to you.
You aren't arguing against things I'm actually saying here, your creating in your head what you want me to believe and then arguing against that. For what reason I have no idea.
I actually believe Blizzard are 100% out to make as much money as they can. They just don't need to rig the game in order to do that.
It was adorable how you keep referring to ZTG as if the card was a real person. I said the card reads the board and selects the best card and somehow you took that off on an algorithm tangent.
Your claim was an attempt to use ZTG as an example of how the foundations for the algorithm are already apparent to us all. However the actual algorithm would be nowhere close to ZTG, so what you said made no sense. You were gloating about arguments you've apparently had with other people in the past, it was really weird. And referring to something as he/she doesn't indicate that it is a real person, infact this is generally how we refer to and speak about AI - I know you're just trying to be cute here but it isn't helping your case.
I like how you interpret Lifecoach's interview to meet your fantasies. Kind of glossed over the "low skill cap" and added some of your ideas as if they were his but again whatever works for you.
Firstly, the hypocrisy here is mind bending. However to respond to your claim, I’m interpreting what Lifecoach has said based on what I know of him (I used to occasionally watch clips of him) and what he has said repeatedly in the past. He has, as far as I’m aware, never made any serious allegations of match rigging. He did often complain about the ladder system, RNG, and how grinding a consistent win rate is more important for competitive play than tournaments. His main issue with this (again going off what he has actually said) is that in a Best of Three RNG has a massive effect on the outcome.
And the game does have a ‘low skill cap’. I’ve said this myself in this very conversation so how you feel I've glossed over it is beyond me. With that being said it is still a card game and the skill cap is in relation to it being a card game. Go kart racing has a greatly reduced skill cap in comparison to Formula 1, that doesn't mean you aren't still going to smash into a barrier. Card games by their nature have levels of play and the level you are playing at in Hearthstone is well outside of the scope Lifecoach is talking about. Like I said you aren’t even involved in the same conversation (neither am I, or the vast majority of others for that matter.)
This is because RNG has a very diminishing effect on your climb the further away you are from your average rank, but once you start to approach your rank and consistently face players of a similar skill level your win rate moves closer and closer to 50%, this is aided by RNG as a high amount of randomness naturally gravitates everyone towards 50%, this means that the amount of people 'at your skill level' is elevated. Before you hit this point however RNG only really has an effect on a game per game basis (such as in a Best of Three), not over a large number of games (Lifecoach touched on this in the quote you linked [and then preceded to completely misunderstand], and is why he believes the game benefits grinding. The more you grind, the greater an impact you will see from small incremental increases in your win rate).
For many people (including yourself) this point is Diamond because the win streaks end here. So a ~50% w/r will no longer be good enough to advance within a reasonable time period. However a high Legend player will not be too greatly effected by RNG at Diamond because they have the capability to maintain a win rate at that level which is high enough to nullify any defeats they suffer due to bad draws and bad luck.
Now most people understand this, they can recognise the concept of plateauing, especially once the safety wheels have been taken off such is the case at Diamond. They realise that they will not be able to go forward unless they improve. Some people however (and this is you) cannot grasp this and therefore assume that there must actually be something wrong with the game.
I really cannot emphasise enough how simple this concept is, and how ludicrous it is that you don't understand it. If you are ever interested in actually understanding how the game works however, then as I have mentioned in previous posts, all you need to do is provide your HSReplay links and allow high legend players review your games which you apparently had no chance of winning. In fact, the concept is so simple and your reactions so ludicrous that assume the reality is actually that in spite of all the bluster, you are completely aware that what you are saying here is complete nonsense, and you know that providing these links will completely destroy your theories.
Also the fact that you think 15 hours of playing a video game isn't a lot just proves my point. There's a great big world out there. Try checking it out sometime.
15 hours is a lot of time, I have never claimed otherwise. Seriously, your reading comprehension is terrible.
This climb was done with a completely fresh account, including the tutorial, on the old (harder) laddering system. Climbing to legend on the new system with a 9x win bonus takes a significantly shorter time. The point is that even in the extreme case I listed, that climb can be done playing 30 minutes per day. Your claims that you don't play enough are nonsense. You're just not good enough to reach Legend within a reasonable timeframe.
To close, it is pretty amusing how you use the age old “go outside, nerd” retort when you have been bleating on about a children's card game being rigged for over 3 years. That is unhinged, man. Like it's amazing that someone like you would even attempt to insult someone about their personal life.
Finally, save maybe correcting any falsehoods that may be brought up this is the last I'll probably say on this matter, unless of course you grow a backbone and provide some HSReplay links. Failing to do that, but continuing to prattle on like you have been with snarky comments and straw men will be enough for me to know that you are wrong, and you know that you are wrong, so I'll see no further reason to continue arguing my points.
0
LOL what? Do you actually believe Lifecoach quit Hearthstone because he believes Blizzard are using a rigged algorithm? He quit because the game has too much RNG, which it does (imo). This inherently neuters the pro competitive scene.
Like literally nothing he has said supports your theories in any way. The 'system' he is talking about is ladder, and how players at the very highest level need to grind every day in order to finish high enough to qualify for events and such. You aren't even included in his conversation because you're not good enough to get to a stage where RNG is even having that great of an effect over a large enough sample size. When he says "good player" he isn't talking about players stuck in Diamond. He's talking more about players who will be consistently making top 1000 Legend. The 5% w/r difference is over a huge number of games and is what separates the very top players (like Top 100 or so) from those just below them.
The reason you bounce from 5 to 1 and back isn't RNG, or a rigged system, it's because you aren't good enough to maintain a win rate that will take you to Legend within a reasonable amount of games. Suck it up. You've already told us that you have over 1000 wins, so don't now act like you don't play enough. I mean I've already linked to someone who started a brand new account, completed the tutorial and made legend in 15 hours of play time.
I mean Blizzard could program just about anything into the game, there's no technological limit to them placing the algorithm which you believe they have into the game. They absolutely could do it.
However it is pretty funny that you believe ZTG is in any way close to that algorithm. ZTG has a basic understanding of the board and player state and selects a 'perfect' card from static pool (the Classic and Basic set). He doesn't consider each players MMR, or whether X player needs to win this game, or if Y player has bought any packs this month, none of that. He doesn't constantly get updated with knowledge of every new card that comes into the game, he doesn't know the synergies of your deck, he doesn't know how your opponents deck works or the best way to beat it etc.
1
I’m not an ‘anti-conspiricy theorist’. Some conspiricies have weight to them and until proven wrong I can understand why people would follow them. Blizzard manipulating the game for profit is a fair enough conspiracy to believe in, there is no smoking gun evidence for it but given the predatory nature of gaming publishers (including Activision Blizzard) I can understand why people don’t trust them.
Some of the things Evil_B is posting are verifiably incorrect, though. I know you are desperate for your feelings to be validated but jumping on literally ANYTHING which you feel supports your beliefs is a pretty sure fire way to look stupid.
Anybody who cannot make Legend just isn’t skilled enough at the game to do so. That’s a fact. They haven’t put enough time into studying the meta, they don’t understand how to mulligan correctly, they have no clue how to hand read, they are usually focused purely on what is happening on the board and not what their opponents will be playing next turn, or the turn after that. “Should I draw cards here or is developing a minion mire important?” “Should I drop my win con now or bait out removal?” Etc
@Evil_B your last comment actually half makes sense. Those things existing DO indicate that Blizzard COULD manipulate the game in nefarious ways. It doesn’t PROVE that they are, however, and it certainly doesn’t explain why you are stuck at Diamond 5 because people who are actually good at the game have no issue sailing into Legend, even on completely fresh accounts, other people’s accounts, old accounts, F2P accounts, P2W accounts, all of it. The only people who cannot make Legend are those who don’t try to, or those who, despite thinking the game is easy, don’t fully understand it.
MMR and a lot of RNG are good ways to jeep everything close to 50/50, you don’t need to rig games. However, to reiterate, Blizzard MAY be doing that. It hasn’t been proven or disproven. Your claims that people cannot make Legend without the game rigging it for them has been disproven countless times however. You could even disprove it yourself if you dropped the act and put some time into really learning how to optimally play the game.
0
Evil_B entered into a conversation in this thread so it's only fair that other people can enter into that same conversation and respond to him.
And conspiracy theories are not 'Salt', if the thread is to be used properly then people post in it after a particularly bad game of HS to let off some steam. This can be as angry and colourful as necessary. Posters coming into the thread quoting people to tell them HS is rigged and Blizzard are greedy is not 'salt' and as far as I can tell not what the thread was created for.
0
What he’s saying isn’t impossible he just got unlucky. He opened 90 packs.
1-10 / 1st pack
11-50 / 2nd pack
51-90 / 3rd pack
The OP is more of a salt thread post but it’s not even a F2P issue, pity timers effect everyone. Opening 3 legendaries in 90 packs would feel a lot worse if you’d paid for them.
0
Yet on the first page of this thread there is a guy who climbed to legend on the first day of creating a new F2P account.
Again, it’s baffling to me why people keep telling these blatant lies, like “F2P players don’t have a chance” despite there being vast amounts of proof to the contrary.
The reason you ‘don’t have a chance’ is because you are bad at the game. Having a full collection is not going to change that.
The last sentence is just completely mental. Why would companies priorities people who openly will never put money into their games? Blizzard never created Hearthstone as a gift to humanity. It was to make money. Therefore people are encouraged to spend money.
With that said, Hearthstone whales are those who want full collections without putting in the time, not competitive players. Competitive players naturally put time into the game so spending money isn’t necessary.
0
You are absolutely pathetic.
0
F2P players are important for the game. The problem is that it just looks completely ridiculous when F2P players claim that things aren't fair, despite the fact that they have no intention of ever putting money into the game. It's just a mad view point to have.
This isn't to say a F2P player cannot have an opinion on how the monetisation of the game is, just putting it forward in a manner which suggests they are being hard done by is completely laughable. And that's what you see all the time on this forum, the Blizzard forums, and probably Reddit too.
Putting forward arguments in a reasonable manner is vital for getting any point across, and is the difference between someone looking silly or looking correct, even if they are essentially saying the same thing. Exaggerating and fabricating points to strengthen you position doesn't help.
I will answer both again with arguments (maybe you can do the same this time around). To be at the top of competitive (playing official tournaments), you really do need to have a full collection on day one of a first expansion, and if you have 12k gold from a rewards track, that means 120 packs. That, for some people, can mean 3-5 legendaries, but on average it will be 6. The game gives you one or two for free, but you still need a wild 18 legendaries toi complete your collection. They are not all playable, but what if you happen to open the bad ones? Usually with a preorder you can save this problem and craft the rest with dust, then you want the pass for the rewards track because it is the most valuable expenditure of money you can do in the game.
This is an exaggeration at best and a lie at worst, claim ad hominem all you want.
Anyone playing the game consistently will earn enough to be able to craft any meta deck at any point. If they are short then they can dust Wild sets.
A player starting the game literally today will have to put some time in before they get to that point, where playing the game pays for itself. But so what? What do they expect?
So yeah, the top of competitive needs to pay to stay on top. Here you can argue that that is fair, and you should pay to get to the top, but that is just proof that the game is not f2p at all, and there are many other examples of games in which only cosmetics need to be paid for, and the rest of the playing field is very level. Hearthstone has been focusing on cosmetics a lot recently, so why can't the players open more legendaries, or have a less frustrating pity timer at the very least?
How does any of this prove that 'Hearthstone is not F2P at all'? At best you have made a good claim that playing Hearthstone at the very, very highest level is not F2P as a HSReplay account is very beneficial. However that has nothing to do with Blizzard, and also isn't necessary as there are other ways to get relevant live info on the meta (one of which is to just ask someone who has an account).
You can also claim that somebody starting the game today will have a bit of a grind to play the game at the highest level. But again, this can be mitigated with tactics such as creating multiple accounts and focusing on only a few classes for each account. Or getting good at and playing Arena/Duels.
I am not interested in politics or how politicians argue (I find the comparisons funny), but I think it's very reasonable to defend f2p players, if Blizzard does not please them, they will never spend a dime. And how you can defend Blizzard's greed (packs getting more expensive, 3 expansions and 3 minisets per year thus more cards to collect, more cosmetics but not making it easier to get the in-game stuff) is beyond me.
I find the game vastly overpriced. I don't think I've ever defended Blizzards pricing model beyond me expecting them to what is best for their wallets. I actually find the price of packs to be pretty disgusting.
0
1)Looking at HSReplay's free stats the best counters to the decks you played are:
Face Hunter (W9-L1): Menagerie Priest, which has a 58% w/r
Deathrattle Demon Hunter (W8-L1): Spell Druid, which has a 60% w/r
Now maybe those stats change at Diamond 5 (HSReplay won't tell me this without renewing my subscription), but for your win rate to be anything short of an absolute embarrassment, the change would have to be astronomical, we're talking possibly never before seen win rates here, and your word that they were all actually "perfect counters" would have to be true, which given your previous is unlikely.
2) It's not too hard to understand, really. I've played the game since 2015. I have a soft spot for it and considering I only stopped playing a short while ago I'm still interested to see what is happening with it, seeing the new cards and checking in what is working and how the meta is changing since I last played. HearthPwn is also on my homepage bookmarks so I sometimes will instinctively click it, then have a short browse and maybe make a post or two before moving on. There's nothing remotely weird or unhealthy about what I'm doing here.
You are putting hours into a game that you 100% know is completely rigged, apparently. The two situations we're in here don't really compare.
3) Why would I care what you think of me? The purpose of you posting replays of your games isn't to satisfy me, it's to add credence to the claims you regularly make that the game is 100% rigged and that nothing matters outside of Blizzards algorithm. Not posting something which would completely vindicate you against all of the criticism you have faced over the last weeks/months or whatever seems counter intuitive. I mean you are clearly passionate about Hearthstone being rigged, so show some proof.
Don't get me wrong, I know the reason why you won't put up replays, you're not fooling anybody here, it's because you know, deep down, that you are just bad at the game, and that these repays will contain numerous misplays which better players will recognise. I've never lost 17 games out of 19 (from 2 back to back lists) in Hearthstone since I can remember and I play exclusively janky meme decks. Doing that with Meta lists is extremely impressive.
2
Honestly I've never seen another (non political) forum that comes close to HearthPwn for this, it's actually pretty intriguing.
In most cases when someone lies, or tries to misguide people, they do so in an obfuscating way. On HearthPwn however, posters, on a regular basis, just flat out make absurd, objectively false, and easily debunked statements. Then despite other posters showing them clear and verifiable evidence that what they are saying is 100% fabricated, they just ignore it and repeat what they were saying anyway.