So I decided to calculate the average placement you get in BGs with 4 hero choices, as opposed to having just two.
methodology
Here’s how I did the calculations:
It is assumed that you go strictly by the HSReplay hero tier list and pick the highest placement hero that you can, according to the top 1% stats.
HSReplay doesn’t have sufficient data for every hero. So for those heroes, I calculated what the average placement is for them assuming that the pick rate stat HSR has is accurate and that average placement globally is 4.5 exactly. Then I assigned all of those heroes that average placement of 4.605. This isn’t perfect but it’s the best I could do with holes in the data.
For weighting purposes, for two choices, the chance of getting the best hero is weighted by the number of heroes minus one, because the best hero can be paired with every other hero and you’d pick the best. For the second best it’s that number minus two, because you can pair it with every other hero except the best and you’d pick it. For four choices, if that number is x then the weighting is =COMBIN(x,3).
All work is here: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1LItdq8r6PyIuuXCMbSR-bO6-IHlDf29AbQUIK--qqAo/edit?usp=drivesdk
Conclusions:
With two choices and ideal hero picking, average placement is 4.431. That’s a little better than the global average of 4.5 because you’re picking slightly better than average.
With four choices and ideal hero picking, average placement is 4.327. That’s only about ONE TENTH of a placement better. It is a very small advantage.
That said, I do acknowledge that ANY tangible advantage is pay to win, but some people act like this is a huge deal when it simply isn’t. BGs heroes are extremely well balanced against each other, although of course not perfectly so.
no accountiong for lobby bans on hero choice is yoiur first error
expecting anyone with an actu brain to believe your made up numbers is your secof
to quot homer : statistics can be used to prove that anything is even remotely true
that is you here
too many assumptionsds need to be made for your theory to be factual
the odd of getting the ideal is doubled with 4 options to pikk from
HSR’s “reliability” to him depends on whether or not it supports his agenda. Its apparently bad 99% of the time, and perfectly fine the 1% of the time he can use it to support his dodgy claims.
That’s only after many adjustments near the end of a BG season when things get more even. When a new season with new heroes and minions comes out it start very the 4 hero choice is a massive advantage when they have busted overtuned heroes that outperform the rest of the field by a wide margin.
That’s not it at all. I don’t want to write a wall of text about it here but the best summary is that it isn’t some black and white thing, but that they’re consistently slightly… off. Example: the front page shows class winrates, which ARE accurate, technically… but only for Bronze through Gold, and only from the “tracker side.” Those are two fairly large caveats, but most people who go there and see it don’t understand those caveats.
I generally don’t like HSR because they display low usefulness and potentially misleading, albeit technically true, information for free and hide all the truly relevant data behind a paywall. As in they really are useless if you don’t pay them. Not because I think they are liars.
I’m not going to argue about the patents here, except to say that they concern matchmaking exclusively and that matchmaking is irrelevant to the discussion.
It’s almost certainty less RNG-sensitive than Constructed; Constructed may give an extremely imbalanced decks-pairing when BGs have 8 “Decks”; also the drawing of cards itself is extremely random especially for aggro decks when BGs have multiple-draws per turn.
Also if they concede and they care about rating: they’ll lose a lot of their rating [and it would be probably very stupid since your Hero being bad in BGs is way less important than your decks-pairing being bad in constructed formats].
