“The enemy is simultaneously weak and strong”
4 Likes
Yeah, but I’ve seen very similar if not identical arguments before from people who I think were sincere
1 Like
By all means, prove it.
This was posted by Max McCall, a Blizzard developer:
Matchmaking works as follows:
We use a formula to assess player skill. After every game, the formula looks at if you won or lost and uses your current rating, your opponent’s rating, and your rating history to generate your new rating. We call this rating MMR for short. In casual and at Legend rank, we pair players with similar MMRs. In Ranked below legend, we pair people with similar star ranks instead of similar MMRs. Your rating is the only input that the matchmaker receives. It doesn’t know what deck you’re playing, what deck you just played with or against, or anything else, except for your rating.
When you press ‘play’ you enter a queue for your chosen game mode. The matchmaker looks at your MMR and compares it to the MMR of everyone else in the queue. If it finds someone else with the same MMR as you, it pairs you into a game. If it doesn’t, it will wait a few seconds and look again. The second time, it doesn’t look just for someone with your MMR; it will also look for someone with an MMR that’s almost the same as yours. If it still doesn’t find a match, it waits another few seconds and looks again. The bound for what MMRs are considered a good match keep widening the longer you’re in the queue; this is to ensure that you don’t have to wait too long to play. Usually a match is found so quickly that the widening bounds never really matter. After the game, your rating is updated, and the process is repeated the next time you queue up.
3 Likes
They recently changed it so it’s always by MMR
Yes, this was a quote from quite a while ago.
Brilliant work everyone 
The fact that it doesn’t look at deck composition and never has is the point you are so deliberately missing.
4 Likes
It’s easier to assume the game is rigged than to admit they just aren’t a very good player.
That said, I still have issues with the MMR only matching. If it’s just mmr, then stars should now be unrelated to rank as well.
1 Like
This ties well to the other thread, which is how gamers are force-fed “achievement” so they keep coming back. Stars and rank serve literally no function now. But NUMBER GO UP gets that addiction hit each time, every month.
2 Likes
That can only happen if you take a random slice of X number of games from everyone in the same rank, which kinda IS what trackers do. However, it should normalize in a few days, tops, and any stats worth reading are spaced just enough so winrates of decks get to normalize under a decent sample (~2 weeks).
Quite the opposite. Doing something shady would risk getting discovered and losing everything - loyal consumers, trust in brand, potentially huge fines, etc.
And for what? Keeping things as random as mechanically possible, you get people addicted to your game naturally, just like we get addicted to pretty much everything that rewards us with dopamine.
Why change that inherent addictiveness and replace it with something artificial, less random, when any short-term profit you can squeeze out of it will be more than offset by the long-term losses from people quitting your game cold turkey?
In case someone doesn’t know, in psychology the term is called “Variable reinforcement schedule”, and basically it says that people (and animals) get addicted to things which rewards only a portion of the responses, and doesn’t show a fixed pattern - which basically means “all random is addictive”.
Gambling machines are designed using that principle, and so is Hearthstone.
https://www.tutor2u.net/psychology/topics/variable-reinforcement
As explained above, “doctoring” someone’s winrate means changing the reinforcement schedule to non-random, which would be detrimental to the game and the company.
Y’all watch too many movies. Evil corps and their misdeeds are exception, rather than a rule (although, in the whole world and throughout the whole history of companies, there were plenty enough examples for one to mistakenly believe it’s a common occurence - it’s not, and those companies are now taught in Business schools as examples of bad practice).
He attacked your education, not you directly. You’re the one who attacks others directly and somehow don’t realize the difference between the two.
You can’t possibly find evidence for anything random. Any pattern you might find (or not find) is only temporary and…well, random xD
If you want to prove something is rigged, you have to prove it’s not random, so good luck and have fun.
Computer science is based on logic xD Mathematics, engineering and logic
I’ve no idea how you concluded that about Neon and I’ve read all the replies. Even if he literally doesn’t know what computer science is, if he’s versed in math, logic and engineering, he’s good to go.
Anyway, the problem here doesn’t encompass only computer science - it dives into psychology, risk management, statistics, strategic management, etc
It’s a complex problem, and any response not taking all of the above into account is an automatic F.
You don’t just wake up one day, grab a coffee and decide you’re going to set up a rigged multiplayer online game based only on what you desire (profits). You actually need to take into account many variables and consult many different corpa employees about their responsibilities and come up with a joint project to implement.
2 Likes
See, that’s just it. This conclusion of yours and the fact it’s not based in reality should at least make you question what you think you know about MMR and rank.
MMR and rank are not independent variables. They are correlated. If MMR goes up, so does the rank. With that in mind, you should immediately recognize how this:
is completely false.
Star bonus depends on at least one of the two variables: MMR/rank. If it depends on MMR, because MMR and Rank are correlated, it also (at least partly) depends on the rank.
And we do, in fact, know that to be true, since hitting rank Legend nets you 10 bonus stars, and hitting rank = 10% * total Legend players nets you 11 stars.
Therefore, this:
should have been this:
Stars depend on your rank, and your rank depends on your MMR, therefore all 3 are inter-related.
When they claimed that “all matchmaking now is MMR only”, what they meant was the rank doesn’t affect matchmaking at all, which is true even if rank is correlated with MMR any number between 0 and 1 (but not 0 and 1) .
Besides, of course rank doesn’t affect matchmaking: matchmaking affects rank.
It’s really quite easy to see how it is rigged, go on a win streak, then see how every game as you progress in the win streak becomes more difficult, to the point where, you WILL LOSE, and there was 0% chance for you to do anything to change the outcome. If this is not rigged, then idk what we are even talking about.
Btw, I have no ill will to the game being rigged. I have no issue winning, I have no bone to pick with the game being rigged. It almost literally means nothing to me, it does not affect me, it is simply how the game is set up and that’s OKAY!
Some of you people are so in denial about this. It’s honestly incredible and probably worthy of a case study for several different college level courses.
the act of arranging dishonestly for the result of something, for example an election, to be changed
Keyword in this definition (from cambridge, btw) is dishonestly. The “rigging” you described is literally just matchmaking, made that way to allow for competition and ranking. Without it, the game would be confined to just the Casual game mode.
We know and expect that kind of “rigging”, and we accept it, because it allows for fair competition and ladder progression. Since that part is transparently known to everyone, it’s not dishonest, so this is NOT what majority of people mean when they use the word “rigging”.
https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/rigging )
Noone is in denial how the matchmaking works and why.
I know you know all this, so I’ve analyzed it for others, who aren’t so lucky to understand your attempts at provocation.
TL;DR - you can safely skip Anucksunamun’s reply, since it’s just a carefully composed attempt at provoking a debate or even a conflict. He doesn’t believe the game is actually rigged in a dishonest way, or if he does, he chooses not to show it - he’d much rather see the forum burn.
3 Likes
No, you don’t know what we are even talking about. First correct thing you’ve said all thread.
it’s all in your head…
1 Like
which has always used MMR matchmaking…
2 Likes
I got the one for a 13 game win streak.
Sure, it has, to match you with a more worthy opponent, but there’s still a lot of randomness contained in matchmaking even then:
a) matchup winrates (your vs your opponent’s deck),
b) RNG in-game
c) How many games played before that one (important for MMR calculation, the less you played, the more sensitive your MMR is to perturbations)
.
.
.
Each one of them swings the game in one direction and their sum determines the result and thus, influences the next matchmaking and the result…and so on, ad infinitum.
It’s still random, matchmaking only narrows the random output from, for example, [all players online] to [all players online with MMR between x and y], to make the game more fair and interesting.
It doesn’t matter if your random function picks a real number between 1 and infinity, or between 1 and 10, both sets contain the equal amount of outputs - infinite. Because of that, it’s still random, and thus, still NOT RIGGED (yes, this is a mathematical proof, verbally expressed but valid just the same).
His primary account has probably been banned.
1 Like