Okay? Now, I don’t want to downplay people’s feelings or personal experiences, but those are a TERRIBLE way to judge how true something is.
That being said, the entire reason I engage with these threads is I’m willing to entertain the possibility that the reason none of these data aggregate sites have detected this “rigging” is because they weren’t looking for it. I try to encourage those who think they know what the rigging is to contact these data aggregate sites like HSReplay and get the data from them that they could use to defend their case. I have even offered to help them collect or analyze the data provided that for each trial they CLEARLY and SPECIFICALLY lay out the rigging mechanism we are testing for. (if we are uncertain of the specifics of how the game is rigged, then we can simply conduct separate experiments for all relevant permutations of the hypothesized rigging mechanism.)
However, despite this, to my knowledge not one person who thinks it’s rigged has even ATTEMPTED contacting these data sites, or created a testable hypothesis that wasn’t so vague as to be useless.
So I don’t wish to downplay how much it must suck to have an experience that makes you feel like the game is rigged, it sucks that you have had a poor experience. But that does not magically make you correct.
Company’s duty to prove they arent rigging their own game!!? Lol. That is like Boeing doing safety inspections on their own planes they build. Lunacy in real life and in the forums because that really happened!
But sorry “Mindblowing” card is not allowed with this strange and blackhole example.
Man do you understand what you said? Boeing of course did its own safety inspections THEN showed to international organizations about them. Barely these responsibiles are going this way, Boeing → international organizations → Airline company → pilot gives you “safety” to fly (for example, airline’s insurance is a result of it for consumers). So when a plane go down, all of them starts to blame each other in legals. For example that is why you can see which type of plane you will use in your flight. If they change type of plane (Ex. Boeing to Airbus) without real reason, you may make objection to your ticket depend on your country.
Also don’t forget that airline issues are much much more strict than data protections. If we enter that area, even I cant get out of there.
https ://gdpr -info.eu/ read it with a better head. Give your regards to goverments, organizations and humanity for keeping our rights. It is just box of rocks that gives green orcs with full set to all of digital companies.
https:// www.usnews. com /news/national-news/articles/2019-11-27/faa-to-individually-inspect-new-boeing-737-max-planes-before-certification
“The FAA will no longer authorize Boeing to inspect its own aircraft, perform pre-delivery safety checks and signoff on the Max planes, a process Boeing has long been in charge of.” Just newly Boeing lost its inspection ability. As I said, your example is wrong. It may only be box of blackholes.
You’re correct, it’s not my job. Or any other player’s job. But like I’ve said to you repeatedly, if this is how I choose to use my free time, you have no right to stop me. Also, how exactly do you think this would go down without players taking initiative? Joe Shmoe is just going to call up his representative or a consumer advocacy group and say Blizzard is “rigging their games, please spend time and resources investigating them, no I don’t have any evidence.” and then off of a random phone call they’re gonna spend the resources and time needed to investigate Blizzard?! That’s just not how things work in reality.
Also, do you really think that those who think the game is rigged are going to trust a governmental report saying that it’s not? The only way they’ll accept it is if THEY themselves conduct the investigation.
It’s not the Defendant burden to provide evidence.
who is the defended here = blizzard
why ?
people claim that it’s rigged without providing enough evidence to support it
Simple
ok but in my case.
I provided an evidence that it is rigged and the means to replicate it.
also a “claimed” proof that exists. and also demonstrated it.
so atm as KaptanErso said “It’s not the PLAYER’s job” it’s blizzard to response to this and deny my claims.
In lawyer’s term. it’s the defendant duty and burden now to provide counter evidence.
and you DMX you are just trolling at this point.
you are not on anyone’s side. you are playing devils advocate.
You either add something useful or stop posting.
useful as Provide Counter argument. proving me wrong or proving me right.
play 10 games with the same deck I provided. and prove me wrong. that’s the very least thing you can do. instead of just sitting on your computer denying everything.
A- The sky is blue
DMX - no it’s not
A- Look at it
DMX- I don’t have to. there is no enough data to provide that.
A- did you look at it ?
DMX- No. even if I did we are just 2 people. we need like 7 billion people and 100 years of studies to proof that
you are just arguing over nothing. and adding nothing
I’m not trolling. But, fine, if it makes you happy, I will play 10 games with your listed decklist. However, if you think that it is possible to tell if any patterns are the result of random chance or actual draw manipulation after a mere 10 games, you are severely mistaken.
If you flip a coin and it lands up heads 10 times in a row, that might seem to you like the coin is clearly weighted, but if everybody on earth flipped a coin 10 times, then for almost 7 MILLION people they would get 10 heads in a row. That’s why you need more than 10 games to be certain if any pattern is simply random chance, or if it’s something else.
I apologize if I’ve come across as contrarian or close-minded. I’m not a fan of your portrayal of me in your “sky is blue” argument, but it’s so tonally different from how you were engaging with me before that I can only assume that I’ve failed to communicate clearly.
I need to object your point because this issues’ laws are based on any claims and need to be answered by company/defendant according to EU laws and several countries as well. The claimer don’t need to show evidence to reach conclusion on how the claimers’ data used by company/organization. If company/organization cant show enough evidence for how they use the data, it is a evidence for the court.
As summary, absent of the evidence is the evidence.
But of course, if they’re the ones conducting the investigation, they’ll be a biased party that views Blizzard as “Guilty until proven innocent” and will latch onto any shred of evidence, no matter how flimsy, that seems to confirm their existing beliefs. Rather than a neutral party with the philosophy of “Innocent until proven guilty”, as it should be.
That simply wouldn’t hold up in court. You have to prove exactly what Blizzard is using the data for. Blizzard is innocent until proven guilty, according to the law.
“Absence of evidence is the evidence” is not good enough. Otherwise, you could claim that Google is collecting your personal data in order to find and recruit any and all right-wing radicals in order to instigate a violent fascist revolution, and then say that because Google won’t disclose exactly what they’re doing with your personal data, that proves your theory. Which is utterly absurd.
they could be rigging it, ive noticed maaaaany times i switch to a complete different deck than before and immediately get countered in a way with decks nobody really would play but apparently wrecks me hard… decks that you never see otherwise. right, doesnt seem fishy at all
anyway, you can’t prove it existing or not. so what the hell do we know unless you made up the matching system yourself
I am actually starting to get mildly annoyed by this type of response. Yes, you CAN prove whether or not the game is rigged, and no, you don’t need the source code or anything like that. We don’t have the “source code” of gravity, yet we’ve been able to prove the existence of gravity.
Besides, I think people may be misunderstanding something even more important: in the field of statistical analysis, you can never reach 100% certainty with your results. Often, the magical number you’re trying to reach is 95% certainty.
So if we collect enough data that shows apparent “rigging”, and we are 95% confident that the patterns are not the result of random distribution, then we would have evidence solid enough to be considered proof.
Welcome to GDPR and customer rights. It is not like person-to-person. It is person-to-company and it is regulated to protect consumers. Because a person can’t have enough powers against a company (I recommend you Pinkerton’s history in America. ) So when the company attracts suspicisous claims on something or it cant prove evidence about what people are suspicious, governments will take the lead. (There are some similar things about Working laws as well, workers have more positive reaction fro courts as a rule)
That is why, when you request your data which is stored in Blizzard and how they use, you may get 200 pages of data.
Welcome to Data Laws, International Relations and International Laws, man. That is why GDPR and other data laws appeared. It is for national securities and governments can’t hand over their countries’ data to a company and run havoc with them. So Google (and Facebook etc) gets many many fines. Google got one of biggest legal fine as I remember.
You may even change the result of polls by rights ads as everybody knows so that is why countries are strict about it.
My gut tells me there’s some sort of rigging going on. My gut is rarely wrong. Especially after spending the last week+ at diamond 5 getting countered over half of my games. This isn’t new. I’ve been playing this game for years and rng takes a swift turn once I hit rank 5. Every time.
My gut is telling me it’s a bunch of people making excuses cause the world’s most casual dCCG proves too difficult for them. My gut is rarely wrong. Bam. See without actual evidence me and you are on equal footing here. It is a paradox to claim that it is clearly visible yet you for some reason can’t actually replicate the results enough that it is stastically relevant. I mean the crowd claiming it is so obvious has such a horrendous understanding of statistics that they think 10 games is a relevant sample size. Why anyone wants to side with HS’s equivalent of flat earthers is beyond me.
My memory tells me that I often remember negative experiences far more prominently than positive ones, making any anecdotal claims of rigging suspect, as people tend to remember the relative handful of times when things went wrong, while forgetting the considerable number of times when things went right.
…Look, KaptanErso, I don’t know what to tell you, what you’re saying comes across as meaningless word salad. I don’t know if English isn’t your first language, or if it’s something else, but at this point, I feel confident in saying that you’re not doing a very good job at communicating your ideas clearly in this thread.
You say things where the subject of your sentences seem to change rapidly with no indication, like you expect us to be mind readers and follow your train of thought as you jump from idea to idea without providing the context other people would require to follow you reasoning.
And you seem to make a lot of claims as if they were self-evident and require no further explanation, but I often find that to not be the case. Like, you seem to think that video games and social media platforms function identically?
Problem is, the only people making these claims are completely uneducated in math and statistics and their claims are not substantial enough to warrant anything. They make qualitative, biased, uninformed observations over limited sample sizes and think that’s sufficient. Guess what, we didn’t get to the moon with monkey think like that.
Joe blow can say ‘ I claim blizzard is stealing my cookies from my cupboard’ and similarly, nothing will come of it.
Over a year ago, the community came up with HARD EVIDENCE that nat pagle was bugged.
This led Blizzard to acknowledge the bug and fix it.
Other people thought maybe animal companion was bugged or rigged or whatever so they set out to prove that it really was huffer most of the time.
It wasn’t.
We have tons of third party data, data that is more trustworthy than blizzards word, that we can deduce played winrate, drawn winrate, most included cards, best turn to draw or play a card, which cards are best to mulligan for etc and the community is very capable of adjusting it to what we are looking for (like huffer occurance or pagle draw chance).