That's hilarious. I will have to try that the next time I play.
- Registered User
Member for 6 years, 1 month, and 17 days
Last active Wed, Aug, 12 2020 13:06:22
- 2 Followers
- 2,132 Total Posts
- 1494 Thanks
Apr 17, 2020maroon5five posted a message on Second Balance Patch Coming Next Week - Nerf to Millhouse & Larger BG Patch ComingPosted in: News
So you think that all of their testers only tried one type of deck for a new class? That seems like a huge hole in their testing. I can understand a testing team not finding the best builds and not finding strange combos that eventually break the game, but to not even try to throw together a simple aggro deck that is not hard to come up with? That seems like a major miss.
Apr 8, 2020Posted in: General Discussion
I think that would make things much harder to balance. There have been a lot of decks in the past that only have one really good counter, and that counter keeps them in check. This would allow you to just ban that counter, which means blizzard would have to make sure every deck has multiple counters, which is something that should already be doing and haven't done a great job at as it is.
Mar 31, 2020Posted in: Battlegrounds
No one is excited to pay for something that they could get for free before, but I think some people are looking at this all wrong. Battlegrounds has basically been a free trial so far to let people see what they would eventually have to pay for. It's not like the mode was always meant to be free and then they got greedy. The free trial is now over and it is never exciting when that happens, but we knew it was coming.
The question really is, is this cost fair? I think if it receives regular updates like it has recently then it might be fair price. 2500 gold is pretty easy to get by just doing daily quests, but I would prefer if there was a reasonable way to pay for it by doing battlegrounds instead of forcing you to play another mode or paying money. I pay for the expansions and play ranked myself a fair amount, so this really doesn't change much for me, but for players who mostly play Hearthstone for Battlegrounds now I think there should be a reasonable way for them to do F2P without playing other modes.
There is a reasonable way for them to play BG's for free without playing other modes, in that they can just play it. They get less heroes to choose from, and they need to be okay with that. If they're not okay with it, buy the pass.
Trust me I agree with you for the most part, but being able to play for free at the drawback of only being able to pick from 2 champions is completely fair.
I'm obviously talking about being able to play and have all the same advantages as someone who pays. In ranked mode you can play a reasonable amount and get the same advantages that people who paid money get, that is not true for Battlegrounds.
Mar 9, 2020maroon5five posted a message on Battlegrounds - Deathwing Nerf Coming, Potential Millhouse Buff and MorePosted in: News
Apparently it's winnable against Deathwing now (he's not the best at "higher ranks" (whatever that means... I usually see him lose(well not got 1st) at 5900 which is in the top 12%) but once again Blizzard is nerfing for the masses. It would be better if people just learned to play around him.
I usually see every hero not got 1st. Just because a hero doesn't get 1st every game doesn't mean it is balanced. I don't think I've ever seen Deathwing get less than top 4, which is a problem in my opinion.
Jan 26, 2020maroon5five posted a message on What powerful class makes you the most and least unhappy?Posted in: General Discussion
The only strategies that really annoy me are pure aggro and heavy control. That generally translates to me hating Hunter or Priest when they are top tier.
Dec 2, 2019Posted in: Battlegrounds
Can we please get rid of Murlocs or revert the buff? Everyone and their mom is trying to get the same stuff and if you went for another route you might as well concede just because of how easy it is to stack them with loads of stats, poisonous etc.
Okay, it might be because of how little diversity this game mode offers. But it's very annoying that you're basically forced to buy specific minions to keep up with your opponents or kiss your ass goodbye. I stopped counting the number of games where I've been offered few to zero Murlocs early on only to get annihilated by everyone else who went for them.
It is very rare for me to see Murlocs as a full strategy, it is too hard to get them into the late game unless you get very lucky. I feel like Murlocs are too weak in most games, and the player (or players) that go for them do well in the early game but are among the first to be knocked out.
Aug 28, 2019Posted in: Card Discussion
If you think that flare should still get its effect when counterspell is in play, do you also think other spells should get their effects while counterspell is in play? For example, should deadlyshot kill an enemy before counterspell is triggered? Spells should be treated the same regardless of effect after all, it's not yugioh where you have different spell speeds.
Jul 31, 2019Posted in: Card Discussion
I don't know if I would say it is WAY better. The lifesteal mechanic is more impactful for warlock than it is in priest.
- To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Jun 17, 2020Posted in: Battlegrounds
"After this attacks" mechanic is stupid, it just made game even more random (in a bad way) since fight outcome is heavily affected by a coinflip of whoever goes first.
Before it was mostly irrelevant who goes first in the early to mid game (maybe aside from bombs), it was only an issue later when cleaves/zapp came into play. Now entire games are turned because stupid parrot attacks first.
Just lost a game because enemy attacked first and his arcane cannon sniped my arcane cannon and I couldn't do anything since otherwise we were very close stat wise.
Jun 12, 2020czapejro posted a message on 17.4 Server Side Patch - Captain Eudora Hero Power In Battlegrounds HotfixPosted in: News
Jun 11, 2020Posted in: Battlegrounds
One thing about the Cannon: whether it's too strong, it's super FeelsBadMan. Opponent attacks first and gets a Cannon shot or two, and there's a decent chance you lose the round. Attack first yourself, shoot well, and it's GG the other way. That kind of polarizing RNG is pretty unfun in the early game.
May 28, 2020ScarfaceRo posted a message on Hearthstone's MM is *NOT* rigged and is *NOT* keeping everyone at 50% win ratePosted in: General Discussion
This whole conclusion is an example of someone who doesn't know how to read the data or how to ask the proper questions. The data shows that you are being kept at a 50%-61% win-rate, excluding seven outliers, one of which is at such a small sample size the data becomes redundant. This is not proof that "you are being kept at a 50% win-rate", but that you are either garbage at the game or your match-ups are being doctored to bring you closer to a 50% win-rate. I.E. you're being matched with an unfavorable opponent/class/deck in order to bring your win rate more in-line with the preferred percentage. If this wasn't the case, many players in legendary would have win-rates in the 75%-90% range.
By definition, Hearthstone is a zero-sum game, meaning that the average win rate across all players will always be 50% (actually a bit less because of the draws, but they're so rare, that we can safely ignore them), so I really fail to see how you can say that someone who has, by definition, higher than average rating (since 61% which is my average is definitely higher [I would dare to say even way higher] than 50% which is the overall average across all players)...
Also, the reason why you don't see people with 90% or so win rate is not that the system is cheating you, but just because you are matched with people with a similar record as yours and you eventually reach a point where you face only people with a similar skillset and you simply can't continue to win much more than 50%. Initially, at the start of the month, (especially in the old system) when everyone was resetted at the same level, it was typical for the pros to climb very fast, many times with a very high win rate, 'till reaching legend (or high legend), but once you get there you'll face people of similar rank/skill and you simply can no longer maintain such a win rate.
I'm really mindblown how you can't grasp such a simple concept which you see everywhere, even in real life... think at a tennis competition (or any other sport)... the pros usually have easy wins in the first few rounds where they face weaker opponents, but as they progress farther in the tournament they just start facing harder opponents (which advanced there too) and they can't keep winning all the time...
May 26, 2020Wiggy_HS posted a message on Hearthstone's MM is *NOT* rigged and is *NOT* keeping everyone at 50% win ratePosted in: General Discussion
ANother two examples just from this morning. If you seriously play this game and still think this is not completely controlled by Activision $$ Blizz you are completely naive.
Battlegrounds, two games: Both lost in the end due to 1,3% chance and 0,1%. Again. Not the first time. Even calculating the chances alone it is completely impossible the game is not heavily controlled, or better said, rigged.
And now, Arena. The FIFTH GAME OUT OF THE LAST 15!!!!! decided through a "random" generated Dragonqueen Alexstrasza.
I quote my last post. Of course those low chances are possible to happen, as people also win lotteries etc.
But there is literally not a single chance this is happening that often in that handful of games. It's against all common sense.
And why does it happen to me? Maybe because the last money they got from me were like 1,50 from my Google Pay wallet I had for free for an arena run. The last time they got money from me is a long time ago.
And if you read the patent of their rigged matchmaking system, that is exactly something stated in there. You pay or you get matched with players that pay :)
It’s interesting for battlegrounds - if you concede early during a new round you see who else dies. And all this whilst they are still playing happily thinking that all the hits are random...
The hits aren't any less random because they take time to resolve/animate, you understand that right?
May 23, 2020ScarfaceRo posted a message on Hearthstone's MM is *NOT* rigged and is *NOT* keeping everyone at 50% win ratePosted in: General Discussion
I decided to make this thread because I recently saw a lot of posts of people claiming that Hearthstone's MM is rigged and if you go over 50% win rate it "cheats" you by queueing you against your counters, give you bad cards in the mulligan or draw, etc.
Of course, like everyone else, I had my highs and lows (with win/lose streaks going on two digits range at times), but I never felt that the system is rigged or that I'm cheated in any way, and by tracking my win rates at the end of each month I was able to notice two things: that each and every month I got over 50% win rate and that the win rate was pretty consistent at the end of each month.
But enough with the "feeling"; I should better get to the facts and give you the cold numbers. But, before that, I should probably give some details about my play style to better get the context: I play at most six games per day, which take an hour at most (so I usually average less than 180 games per month), with the best possible deck that matches my daily quest (so that means that I don't play a deck enough to really master it and that I don't always play tier 1 decks because not all classes have them). I'm also a decent player (reaching legend in most months and having a couple of top legend rankings), but I'm definitely nowhere close to calling myself an expert, a hardcore, or a pro player.
And now the numbers (print screens to prove them will be provided at the end of the post):
December 2017: 61% win rate (83-52)
January 2018: 68% win rate (57-27)
February 2018: 68% win rate (61-29)
March 2018: 62% win rate (92-56)
April 2018: 58% win rate (104-76)
May 2018: 57% win rate (79-59)
June 2018: 67% win rate (85-41)
--- that was my best month ever, ending the month in top 5 legend and holding for a while even the #1 legend, at which point I had a hard time finding new challenges in the game so took a half-year break ---
January 2019: 66% win rate (129-65)
February 2019: 57% win rate (112-85)
March 2019: 61% win rate (114-72)
April 2019: 61% win rate (81-51)
May 2019: 57% win rate (79-59)
June 2019: 74% win rate (34-12)
July 2019: 67% (8-4)
August 2019: 57% (134-100)
September 2019: 61% (17-11)
October 2019: 57% (79-59)
November 2019: 57% (75-57)
December 2019: 57% (75-57)
January 2020: 57% (35-26)
February 2020: 58% (50-36)
March 2020: 61% (35-22)
April 2020: 57% (103-77)
The average (excluding the two months with less than 50 games) was 60.1%; out of the 21 tracked months only four months (two which were during the old system where we were all resetted back to rank 18, so first few games were almost auto wins and two during which I had a lot of luck and managed to end the month in top 10 legend) had a variation of more than 3% from my average 60% win rate, while during the rest of 17 out of 21 I consistently had between 57% and 63% win rate. And, btw, this month I'm also at 58% win rate far now.
I think that, while it can still somehow be seen as anecdotical evidence since they're just my personal games, there is enough evidence to see that there is a pattern that says that no, the game is not forcing everyone at 50% win rate, but it just aims too point everyone toward that value via MMR, but, ultimately, everyone's win rate is a personal constant dependent of their skill compared with the skill of the average player - a better player will have higher than 50% win rate (the better the player, the better the win rate) and a bad player will have lower than 50% win rate (the worse the player, the lower the win rate) - the MMR is simply trying to limit those variations so we don't end up having people with 80% and people with 20% win rates.
So, seriously, if you think Blizzard is artificially capping your win rate at 50% win rate and it simply doesn't let you break over it, how you explain the fact that in 23 tracked months, spawning over three years and a lot of various expansions and metas my win rate never fall bellow 57% (and that while still being a rather regular/casual player playing at most one hour a day and switching decks/classes depending on whatever daily quest I get)?
And, as I promised, here are all the referenced screenshots: https://imgur.com/a/xNIoA1u
I further detailed my playstyle and win rates depending on deck variation in this answer: https://www.hearthpwn.com/forums/hearthstone-general/general-discussion/242896-hearthstones-mm-is-not-rigged-and-is-not-keeping?comment=16
- To post a comment, please login or register a new account.