Hard numbers - be nice if I could update them with out making new topics

New Player Tavern
1

First off, let me say that I would have posted in my other thread as a continuation but Blizzard won’t allow that as I am the last poster, and also can no longer edit my last post. The only way to get the hard numbers posted is to create a new thread.

(synopsis:) Unbalanced comp matches when non gold hero’s (less than 500 wins) play against someone who has earned their golden hero (500+ wins). Basically the golden hero player has accumulated high level cards either by crafting, opening packs, solo modes, events, that a relatively new player would have to be very lucky to have a comparably strong deck for it to be considered a reasonably balanced (deck wise) match. This leads to frequent scenarios where the gold hero’s deck is overpowered.

Purpose: To show Blizzard with hard data that a more balanced/fair comp opponent selection should also include segregation of a player using a deck comprised of a hero class whom they have earned 500 or more wins (whether they choose to use the golden hero or not) to only be selected to face other 500 or more wins hero class decks and obviously vice versa, 499 or less win hero class decks should not face 500 or greater hero class decks.

So as I said I am recording my games for Comp. and their win/loss percentage. Casual/brawl/arena for quests are not tallied in the final calc but are recorded for my own interest. I could post the individual game by game results but here are the totals as that’s what is important. The difference in my win percentage against Gold, versus against normal is too large to simply state it’s my skill level as many players like to contest. I feel it’s more they have an advantage over others and hence the benefits of frequent wins/higher rankings, and don’t want to lose that. The numbers speak for themselves. Mind you it’s only over 70 games thus far, but I intend to record it for as long as I play.

TOTALS
Normal Wins: 27 Normal Losses: 28 Normal Win Percent: 49.09%
Golden Wins: 2 Golden Losses: 13 Golden Win Percent: 13.33%
Total Wins: 29 Total Loses: 41 Final Percent: 41.43%
2

Friendly reminder that Golden Whizbang makes the hero portrait gold. You cannot prove that any of those 15 have 500 wins on the class.

Furthermore, I’m willing to bet that if I’m playing seriously, I beat you the majority of the time, but I have less than 100 wins on most classes and less than 150 on all.

3

You’ve already mentioned both these things in a previous thread. Now it’s just trolling bordering on harassment.

Truth be told, I can not 100% say if the gold hero’s are 500+ wins or not. But the more games I record, the less likely that all of them fall into your viewpoint.

Which brings me to current results. I should note I had included some brawl/quest totals in the previous and have removed them.

Normal Wins: 26 Normal Losses: 34 Normal Win Percent: 43.33%
Golden Wins: 5 Golden Losses: 20 Golden Win Percent: 20.00%
Total Wins: 31 Total Loses: 54 Final Percent: 36.47%
4

The suggested matchup method may not be reliable as you can see very experience players (with great decks) not being Gold, and Gold players (e.g. Gold WhizBang) can also be new players without much game experience.

With a final WR of 41% over 70 games is quite normal with current settings. A more practical way for you, is maybe to seek help on deck built and gameplay. There is alot of people in this forum that can offer help, but you do need to find the best fit with your personality/game preference.
In the process, you may also find the knowledge/skill gain exceed the impact of the matchup system at current.

5

And I’m going to continue saying it. Pointing out flaws in your method isn’t harassment simply because you don’t like it.

6

Repeating the same thing across multiple threads is trolling. Trying to incite an off topic debate by challenging my ego repeatedly in multiple threads in hopes that I will be goaded into it, is harassment. I didn’t bite the first time so unless you have something new and on topic to add, I will ask you again in this second thread, to stop harassing me and trying to hijack the thread by inciting a debate through challenging my ego.

7

I’m not challenging anything, simply implying that your statistics suggest you’re bad, not so much that Golden heroes or 500 wins are a problem. You being bad is not a problem as long as you recognize it because until you recognize it, you cannot fix it.

Rank 20 players are bad players regardless of how shiny their hero portrait is. Rank 5 players are good players regardless of how shiny their portrait is. You can track your win rates all you want, but they aren’t bad because your opponents have 500 wins and you don’t, they’re bad because you’re making mistakes. Stop blaming the matchmaking, focus on what you’re doing wrong and you will do better, entirely regardless of how shiny your opponents hero is.

Because that does not matter, and the sooner you realize that the sooner you can address the real problem - your mistakes.

Regarding deck imbalance, a friend of mine just started and crafted a full, 100% complete Bomb Hunter deck with 3 legendaries (1 was Snip Snap though) without spending a cent before he got to rank 30. Bomb Hunter is one of the strongest decks right now. The player with 500 wins is not at any sort of advantage based on deck crafting, intelligent players who do a little research will find they have multiple powerful options craftable entirely free well before they reach rank 25.

I am taking a challenge with the new set to go from rank 50 to rank 5 on a fresh account without spending money. I think that will go quite a bit further towards disorganized your point about 500 wins meaning better decks than your personal statistics will to proving it.

1 Like
8

Nice theory but weak. If it was truly simply my skill, then my win/loss ratio vs gold would be close/similar to non gold. A 5-10 percent disparity either way between the two would support your theory. A 25-50% or more disparity does not in my book. Are you trying to say that my skill level only drops when competing against golden hero’s or vice versa, only increases when fighting normal heros? I’ve seen a difference as much as 51.3% normal and 13.3% gold. How does my skill play into that.

Everyone’s skill fluctuates to a certain degree. Trying to convince me that mine only fluctuates in the same direction vs a given hero type by more than what would be considered a normal amount of fluctuation is preposterous.

I seem to make more mistakes against golden hero’s and less vs non. Sure what ever you say bud.

Also you’ve already mentioned the Hunter bomb deck in an old thread. Get some new material.

Also, I’m backing my findings with hard numbers. Where are yours? Further, you have no idea what cards are being played by them (ie multiple 1k+ craftables), but would love to convince the audience that this is not the case and rather it is simply my skill. Show me the data you are basing your conjecture on.

As for your personal challenge, good luck with that. Don’t bother trying to do what I’m doing for hard data to try and convince me your right, as I don’t trust you enough to not fudge the numbers to skew the data in your favour. Save yourself the time and headache.

But if you do, here’s the way I record for example. Keeps track of streaks too btw.

eg:

Comp STD - 6-23-2019
Win/Loss Golden Heros Normal Heros
lose 1 1 0
win 1 0 1
lose 3 2 1
Arena Match - Wins: 4 - results not included in totals
Comp STD - 6-24-2019
Win/Loss Golden Heros Normal Heros
lose 1 0 1
win 1 0 1
lose 1 0 1
win 1 0 1

If there was an easy way to import each game and card played into an excel sheet, I’d do that too and correlate high level craftable cards (that non 500+ win hero’s are unlikely to have) with gold losses. But hey the ignorance of the dev’s to acknowledge and address the issue, along with players like yourself who seem to not want the status quo to change, and try to intimidate and belittle people who speak up rather than gather their own hard data, it’s not worth the investment to do even if it was simpler.

Finally FYI (anyone’s really) when I’m ready to update my totals, If I’m not able to post them because i’m the last poster and too much time has passed to edit, the thread will be deleted, a new one created with the new totals. Just wanted to get that out there so people won’t be prone to thinking I rage deleted it because of Mr. Loco.:grin:

I guess I should add, that if your theory is accurate, then if enough time goes by, with me consistantly adding accurate data, the numbers will prove you to be correct. That simply means; all you need to do is, sit down; shut up; and let the numbers speak for themselves.

9

Whizbang decks are decently strong, but not meta. At your rank it’s more likely you’re facing them than actual golden players, and if you aren’t very good at the game they can very easily be too much to handle for you. The same goes for Zayle, but to an even greater degree as Zayle’s decks are slightly more viable with the exception of the Warlock.

There. Easy explanation for the disparity I’ve been taking into account since my first reply, almost as if I actually read your data or something.

10

Conjecture.

How many games have you watched me play to assess my skill level?
How many games vs golden hero’s that did not have Whizbang or Zayle did I face and lose?

If you have hard numbers for either of these questions to support your claim,
please explain how you obtained them and provide the external identifiable source so that they can be independently verified or have Blizzard confirm the numbers as an independent source.

Aside from either of these, even if we were to take your statements as factual, it can not prove alone if it is a case of either; equal player skill level but unbalanced decks, vs unequal skill of players with balanced decks. This leads into the concept of why is it every time I face a golden hero, I’m a matched with someone who is either a) much better skill than I am, or b) has a much better deck than (as per craftable cards possible by 500+ players)? Should not the match making system be finding someone of a closer comparable skill level? Why does it only seem to fail when it selects golden portrait hero’s? In either cause of case (your or my assertions) there is obviously some short coming in Comp Opp selection and some sort of correlation with golden heros.

11

I don’t need to watch you play to assess your skill level. If you were good, you wouldn’t need to be told that a golden hero doesn’t matter, you wouldn’t have a 48% win rate against non golden heroes and you wouldn’t have a 41% win rate overall. This isn’t conjecture. Good players don’t have 41% win rates regardless if what deck they’re using, as evidenced by me taking a fresh account to rank 18 using a bad deck with upwards of a 90% win rate (6 losses the whole time)

You want my data? You provided it for me.

Also, by 100 wins you probably have enough dust to craft most decks in the game, you get a ton of dust free from packs just laddering to 25. This is more than likely going to be enough to craft a full power (or mostly full power) Bomb Hunter deck, which is easily in the top 3 right now. Disregarding entirely that that on its own disproves your suggestion that you don’t have access to the same level of deck, let’s take a look at what new players actually get.

The new player experience gives a total of 26 packs for free (18 Classic, which also guarantees a Legendary, 2 each of the most recent 4 sets) and by the time a player has 100 wins period, not even on the same class, disregarding packs from Tavern Brawl they have gotten in addition to any daily quests and win bonuses another 700 gold, which gets them to 100 gold away from another GUARANTEED legendary from a Standard set of their choosing, and this is assuming the absolute worst RNG. With their win bonuses, they have that guaranteed legendary and 200 gold toward the next. If they pull one of their legendaries from the Rank 25 packs for instance they can skip that set entirely, saving 800 gold toward their next GUARANTEED legendary, which actually gets it for them even with the worst RNG possible apart from that

So by 100 wins alone we already have 36 free packs from just starter quests and win bonuses, no Tavern Brawl or dailies at all. We have at least two Legendaries due to guarantees from 10 Classic packs and whichever standard set we choose (the 10 pack guarantee is not speculation, Blizzard has confirmed it). Furthermore, we have opened a total of 36 packs which means, on average, we have pulled 2 more Legendaries and 7 Epics independent of the pity timer. Working with these numbers, and considering that this means we have 180 cards from packs and that each that does not have a Legendary/Epic does have a rare, AND assuming that aside from the averages as stated by Blizzard we have the worst possible RNG our total dust is as follows:

4 Legendaries: 1600
7 Epics: 700
25 Rares: 500
144 Common: 720

Total: 3520 dust

My Bomb Hunter deck costs under 3000 and is tested and viable at at least Rank 5, almost certainly Legend. A variant of Zoolock was taken to Legend this rotation for 800 dust. WORST CASE SCENARIO assuming average Legendary/Epic pulls you have nearly enough dust for two Legend viable decks. So stop this nonsense about not having enough dust to craft decks on the same level as your golden hero opponents. You do. There are proven decks that are dirt cheap.

Once again, your problem is not the matchmaking, it’s not your opponents, it’s that YOU are bad and you’re too stubborn to improve. Your own win rate statistics back this up.

How do I know you’re ranked low? Because a 41% win rate does not climb. Even with win streaks.

12

Sorry but numbers speak for themselves, if it was purely my skill then the percentages would be relatively close. I’m sure you can agree that a players skill does not fluctuate wildly dependent upon which type of hero/deck they are facing considering the opponent has been selected as a relatively similar skill level and rank. Given that, it can not explain a more than 50% difference in win/loss ratio between the two hero types as my current numbers show.

Normal Wins: 32 Normal Losses: 39 Normal Win Percent: 45.07%
Golden Wins: 6 Golden Losses: 25 Golden Win Percent: 19.35%
Total Wins: 38 Total Loses: 64 Final Percent: 37.25%

The longer I record, the more accurate the data. You can argue with me all you want, the numbers won’t change, and the explanation they provide is all I need.

13

I believe the key thing is to find out the reason for the poor winrate with golden matchup (in your case) and also the normal matchups.

The are still missing details to fully assess your situation with matchup type, freq, what deck you are using, etc, etc…

With only the presented data above available, most players would could only assume the weakness be the deck strength or skill related.

For starters, it might be more fruitful to show your decklist and your matchup freq with archetypes.

14

The only thing the numbers actually prove is that your gameplay and/or deck building needs serious improvement. You are consistently worse than your opponents, leading to your now-abysmal 37% overall win rate.

That isn’t happening because your opponents have golden heroes no matter how much you shove your head in the sand. You are your problem, and the sooner you accept that the sooner the rest of us here can actually help you get to a positive win rate

Post your deck. Better yet, post a replay of one of your games. Listen to the critiques you get instead of blowing it off as bad matchmaking. Or don’t, and observe your precious statistics getting worse and worse, it’s entirely up to you.

Also, your current numbers show a 26% difference in win rate, which is nearly half of the more than 50% you claim and which is, again, adequately explained by poorly built decks and poor decision making going up against the passably decent decks of golden Whizbangs and Zayles. Your original numbers still weren’t even close to 50% difference. That would require you have a positive win rate against one type of hero.

15

Incase you were unaware; I did not post here for critiques, or really any sort of comments from others. You/they took that upon themselves to do so.

Might want to check your math:

Golden Win Percent: 19.35%
Normal Win Percent: 45.07%

Last time I checked, 19.35 was less than half of 45.07 ie >50%. But hey, believe what you want, keep your comments to yourself as I really have no interest in them. If you truly feel the need to comment, do it somewhere else where it will be appreciated.

16

That’s not what a 50% difference is. A 50% difference is 55% vs 5%. Difference and increase/decrease are not the same thing, your calculation yields the percent decrease. Difference literally means subtract, not divide.

Your difference is 26%.

If you want to keep losing, by all means ignore the people who can fix your problem. No skin off our backs. I’m going to continue pointing out how ridiculously stupid your thought process here is as long as you keep complaining with it though

17

Fine, what is the ratio expressed as a percentage of normal win percentage compared to golden win percentage?

edit, you know you are knit picking, and fully understood what I meant but would rather find something to show your ultra superiority about again.

18

I actually didn’t because it was phrased so poorly and even after you explained what you meant I still had to read it twice.

So I’m only going to ask this one more time. Do you want to see those statistics improve, or are you just looking for a circle jerk? If you want your win rate to go up, save a replay of one of your games and link it here, then actually listen to the feedback you get.

Whining about golden heroes isn’t going to get the matchmaking changed to something you like better. So if you aren’t going to listen to anyone’s feedback, you might as well just stop wasting your time.

19

The only thing I want is for you to stop harassing me. When you’re asked once to stop and go away, if you continue to do the same thing, it’s harassment.

Blockquote
Harassment is a form of discrimination. It includes any unwanted physical or verbal behaviour that offends or humiliates you. Generally, harassment is a behaviour that persists over time. Serious one-time incidents can also sometimes be considered harassment .

20

This is a public forum. If you make posts, you get replies. You don’t always like the replies, and frankly that isn’t my problem. Report me if you want, I think I’ve already made it abundantly clear I don’t particularly care

1 Like