Hearthpwn

Quote from Thaella >>

Haha, you forgot that it's pay to win. They can and will tilt the odds in favor of people who spent more money. Other developers have been caught doing that as well. I'd be interested to see a study.

 Would it matter if there is a study? Would you actually believe the results if they differed from what you want them to be? The answer to both of those is no. You refuse to interact with anything that opposes what you believe. 

One would think that with the amount of people playing this game surely someone else besides a few random people on this site would have come to the same conclusion as you. They haven't though. There's also add-ons like Bob's Buddy that simulate the battles and seem pretty spot on in terms of probability. Do they know if you paid Blizzard money too and adjust your odds?

I've seen way more unlikely things and didn't think anything of it. I'm surprised by the amount of people who don't understand large data sets and probability.

Quote from GeneralTrelian >>

Wow, Moon-Bacon Jazzer in tier 3, what an unprecedented change that will surely affect the meta in many new and never before seen ways

 Makes it easier to get Quillboar you actually want in Tier 2 and get things moving which is nice. Although, I would prefer it as a Tier 4 and gives +1/+1.

Quote from Zizka >>

Did you keep track of your games on HSReplay? If so, do share please. I'd like to see your sample size and the outcome to determine whether or not it's significant. 

 We all want the answer to that. Unfortunately, it's clear that they don't and they only respond to each other. They just work each other up rather than responding to anyone that as a counter point (even with actual proof). It's quite sad really.

Quote from jjgamesworth >>

Quote from Dunscot >>

Quote from jjgamesworth >>

Blizzard for sure matches you with certain decks or starting hands that they know will cause a loss. It prevents ppl from going on 20 game winstreaks,

According to the game's records, my longest winstreak is 65 games.

I dunno. If the system is meant to prevent that from happening, it's doing a pretty bad job.

 

 Bro how is that even possible. 65 ranked games won in a row, how is that even possible.

 Can you provide a reason why he was able to do that when you said it was impossible? Seems like he destroyed anything you had to say with a single screenshot and a snarky one-liner.

Quote from Horrorwolf >>

Quote from Zizka >>

It's simply far too easy to manipulate player matches, card draw, or rng with algorithms if you understand anything about coding.

Great, explain it. Give examples of a match where a player had spend more money and were given a perfect draw in a given situation against a player who was free-to-play. Explain it to me. Maybe you're right, maybe the game is rigged in that way. I'm only interested in the truth, it's certainly possible that I'm wrong.

No. I'm not a dev assigned to building their proprietary algorithms, nor would I want to be. See, Blizzard has kind of this awful history of enforcing bad practices in their games of late from Hearthstone, to Wow, to Diablo, to Overwatch..and in many cases outright lying to gamers even.

Why would I waste time. You believe what the hell you want to. This is a forum, not some municipal court.

1.Most corporate entities in the gaming industry will do anything to get more $$$ out of player.

2. Blizzard has very clearly stated this on multiple occasions that their matches are fixed to try to maintain a 50% win ratio for all players. What does that mean specifically? Who they hell knows, but it still means they rig matches whether you like it or not.

3. Most players can attest to running into a suspicious string of counter decks based on what you put in your own deck and that's all the evidence I need.

When the game wants you to lose, you will lose.

 I code for a living and I don't see any viability to doing what you are talking about. It could only be done if things were completely static and exist in a vacuum. Kind of like how a meta report does. You have to assume way too many things like that all players have the same collection, they all will put the same cards into a deck, they will always play optimally, they are at equal skill levels, the deck order and how that impacts the game, etc. And then on top of all that doing it in a way that no one who actually tracks these things will notice. Because it would show up in data. I guarantee you no developer is that good.

Then on your points above:

1. Yes very true. Hence why they are risk averse and don't like bad publicity. Rigging things to give certain groups of players higher win rates without telling them certainly does that.

2. This is easily accomplished by matching you against a "Worthy Opponent". No rigging needed. it is that natural outcome on any ladder system. If you're a legend player you will likely be well above 50% until getting to high diamond and legend again and you are playing against your peers. 

3. A small amount of bronze players on a forum where less than 0.01% of the player base frequents. Nice try buddy. In general, you should look for more evidence than that on anything in life. Confirmation bias is not truth. Care to answer about the guy above who had a 65 game winstreak?

Also, I have not spent money on this game since 2015 and have noticed no such trends that are anything outside of normal variance. But then again I use a deck tracker so I actually know...

Lol wut? People actually play Battlegrounds. It's not about skins. It's about it being a clearly inferior game mode that no one plays. 

Good riddance. Remove mercenaries at the same time and call it a day. 

So it's not about design perspective. It's just about which class you don't enjoy. No need to be so pretentious.

The clear answer is Priest. It has been the only class that needed to get a complete redesign. Druid is a close second because it feels so limiting. It doesn't take much for Druid to be broken at any given time. The rest are pretty good.

Quote from sxa >>

I also wondered if there is some sort of script that penalyze players without tavern pass.

 

Then how do I explain my recent run of just absolutely getting run over lately? I have bought the Battlegrounds Pass every time since it started.

The amount of times lately I just run into an opponents who have boards that are just miles better than mine on turn 8-9 is ridiculous. I'm getting way more top 8's than top 4's as of late. It could also be that I rose in rating and am facing better players and have not adapted. That would probably be considered nonsense around here though.

Quote from Zoc7331 >>

Of course, You can't prove much without documentation and data so I think I will start doing just that.

 

 Looking forward to your presentation.

Quote from DickDraggin >>

It's a bust for me too.  I can't read what the anomaly is while choosing my hero on Android mobile. 

 I play on desktop and cannot hover over and read what anomaly it is 50% of the time lol. It just doesn't popup with text. 50% is probably generous though since some are blatantly obvious when you start.

This was more coherent than any other post I've seen on here.

I'm having trouble keeping up with them at this point, but I do like them overall. There are some that just don't hit with me (one that gives right minion divine shield and left reborn) and some that I think should be there forever (tavern upgrades every 2 turns automatically). That's just the way it goes I guess. They make Battlegrounds way more interesting overall and provide new ways to play the mode. 

Quote from Zizka >>

Where’s the enjoyment in winning without any challenge? I’m referring to those easy bot-wins. Suppose you reached Legend or high legend facing those bots, what have you achieved? 

 It's hard to believe that many words were written about a case that does not happen. No bots are ever gonna be anywhere close to legend. In fact for me they disappear well before I hit gold. The Blizzard ones I have never faced except in my first games of twist. Don't worry, your perceived sense of self-satisfaction is well protected. I swear nothing is worse than people who need to feel good about winning in a video game.