I think what is happening is that the 'it’s rigged" cult players are playing sub optimally which allows their opponent extra turns to find more BS outs from the random clown fiesta of the game design. They get tilted and whine about how the game was stolen from them when the fault was of their own making.
Twenty characters req
1 Like
I’ve been writing a scientific paper on the secret and ultra hidden algorithm that rigs the game in your favour, after you make a purchase in the shop.
The way it works is you make a purchase, and then you will notice that you might win your next game .
2 Likes
I tested this once and found that it wasn’t proven.
1 Like
Its pointless to worry about this type of people they are beyond saving.
On to more important things, you re finally getting a good game on your paperweight, gamers need a win after Dragon Age yikes.
Oh and it comes out on PS5 as well soon after lol,Xbox never fails to throw away a W.
2 Likes
There was that one guy who claimed to have thousands of games all logged on paper that “proved” his rigging theory, but we had to fly to Prague to see it because he wouldn’t scan the pages to upload them and didn’t have a camera phone to take a photo and upload it.
(I think he may have been making it all up.)
1 Like
Probably posted several times on this thread already but i cant see when scroll up so why not another post now that this thread has been brought back to live.
I think its pretty much an algo that drives the rigging algo. Yep its rigging algos all the way down.
This rigging selection algo works on purchases,money spend,time spend and maybe more parameters. Maybe giving a positive bonus towards new players for some time,which will eventually degrade the longer they wait with making a purchase. So if you spend a lot of money you will get better rng,which will then start to drop off slowly. They probably ran this through some neural net to find the most optimal settings for algo that riggs the rigging algo so to say.
Something like this. When i read it back i have to admit that it does sound crazy. But yes i think its something like this,if there is something.
1 Like
Players that spend no money and routinely climb would argue against you. What do you say to them?
Also, hey, @neverlucky! I hope your luck changes soon. 
Must be luck! The more you spend, the better the result . Definitely!
How can you see when you end up deleting 90% of the posts you make?
You’re worse than my ex
1 Like
Thanks for the chuckle! 
You misunderstand, which is understandable. It’s pretty nuanced and it’s difficult for most humans to accept what they don’t want to accept. It isn’t the fact that one loses after their win% reaches a certain point. It’s in HOW they lose. Which makes it rigged. Because of the algorithm at work. Why do you think they fell in love with Discover? Because it’s an additional layer to allow them to control match outcomes. Not because we all liked it when it came out, which we did. Again, I understand your confusion and refusal to listen to me, it’s a difficult pill to swallow realizing how the game you enjoy or invested time and money in is rigged. I get it. I forgive you.
That’s pure conjecture. The Devs don’t have to micromanage the game so closely to achieve their goals. Their goal is most probably maximizing the time played of players by pushing the win rates of most players close to ~50% as fast as possible.
And in order to push the win rate of people close to 50% as fast as possible they can only use a very beefy K-factor on the Elo-algorithm of their MMR system, basically it makes you lose very easily on a small win streak and vice versa.
You are technically wrong here. While I do not think they do this for other cards, they literally have the tech for discovers to choose the “best” card possible. Two Zephrys cards can do it. Again, I do not think they add it to other cards.
The new zephyr is officially confirmed to be purely random. The old zephyr was officially non-random.
Occam’s razor; they don’t have to micromanage it; they can just give you high MMR on a win streak.
I am aware. I literally say in my post I do not think they do it. I am simply saying they TECHNICALLY have the tech to make discovers get the perfect card. That was the only point I was making,
It’s completely different goals for the Devs in this context with the old zephyr. They wanted it to be a smart card (not to control the literal win rate of the player).
I was replying to someone saying the Devs supposedly use discovery cards to control the win rate.
No, it’s proven
This however is correct; That’s what the algorithm is for. They already have the micromanage equations in place to get the results they choose. No one needs to do anything to micromanage anymore, unless they want to change a parameter.
Ugh, it’s been discussed many times, so I’m just gonna quote this, for example:
And, obviously, this too, yes.
I would request a link to an ISO standard for matchmaking, but this is probably pointless, as is reading the bulk of this topic generated by the usual ‘suspects’… Sorry if I’ve missed something substantial while scrolling through all this spam.
These forums are repetitive, yes, as is this notion.
They do delete threads and start it all anew, though. Anyone remember that old tale about Sisyphos?
Yes, I wrote many times about it: https://us.forums.blizzard.com/en/hearthstone/search?q=zephrys%20%40SparkyElf-2852 . See also ‘Optimotron’ etc.
It’s refreshing to meet someone with a brain, who notices such obvious things, on these forums, though. A rare sight nowadays…
Hmm, I haven’t thought of that or noticed that it was updated (used to be quite dumb in the beginning, I think, and then… I haven’t really looked), thanks for this bit! It’s not often that someone actually contributes something to my little personal repository of this kind of knowledge about the game or surprises me with some new information of this sort.
Yes. Or it is their job, or their whole sense of self-worth is founded on trolling what they perceive as ‘conspiracy nuts’ (more common then you’d imagine in illiterate ‘saiance’ wannabes), or these aren’t even people, but rather crude chatbots posting the same drivel over and over again… There are some possibilities.
In packs, most likely.
That one knows nothing of statisctics as a maths discpline, I’ve checked (nor do most, in not all, of them). See, for example, this:
As for proof or ‘evidence’, as they like to call it for some reason (armchair barristers and sofa judges, I must assume)… I suppose I’ll just self-quote again:
You know, even if you’d return home after a long absence and found your wife pregnant, they’d probably deny anything fishy has happened and postulate that it was probably Darwinian spontaneous life generation that occurred, not an adulter. 
What? Surely, they’d say, the former possibility would just be an unlucky ‘RNG’ event affecting you, and the latter is a priori inconceivable, because it is inconceivable, and anyone claiming otherwise is a paranoid conspiracy loon and so on.
PS By the way, rational decision-making would imply assuming the most likely option (e.g. when it breaks the 60% probability threshold or something along those lines), even if it turns out wrong, but I guess they didn’t ‘get the memo’, as Americans would say, and blindly defend what is conceivable or comprehensible to them.
For more about behaviour patterns of these characters, see also, for example:
Even their vocabulary and ‘arguments’ (mostly purely fallacious and demagogical, of course) are… predictable. “‘You’ problem”, ‘cognitive bias’, ‘tin foil’, ‘see no evil’ etc.
(UPD: Expanded and edited a bit)
PS I’d like to think that it’s all just someone’s hobby project with those neural networks, but I’m afraid even AI nowadays isn’t that dull.
2 Likes
You wrote yourself a novella, friend. 
You do raise some interesting ideas I haven’t considered, though. So, thank you.
1 Like