Except this is actually not what they said at all. The keyword here is want: “we want fair matches for everyone (aka. win-rate close to 50%)”. You then paraphrase this as “the system won’t let you have much higher than 50%ish winrate” which is much, much different.
Like many other competitive games, they basically use skill-based matchmaking. Winning will match you against better players where, in theory, you will play more players near or above your “skill” level and get closer to a 50% winrate when you are less able to farm easy prey. Blizzard only has so much control with the MMR system since it is player versus player (not player versus Blizzard AI). There will be players who rise far above 50% and those who fall below.
Technically these are different, but it’s the difference between intent, which is imaginary, and results, which are real. If the intent of wanting a 50% winrate for everyone is made real, then the product is the exact same thing as a system not letting you have much higher than a 50% winrate over a significantly large sample size. So, no, they’re not much, much different; they’re trivially different.
They have complete control over it.
Not if they play a significantly large number of games. I guess you’re kinda right that there’s a lot of players who play a small number of games then stop. You only need to win a single game to achieve a 100% winrate, if that’s the only game you play. But if you keep playing, MMR matchmaking will drag you back to the mean.
This is sad because afkplaying is mostly wrong about rigging, but you fail at criticizing even an easy target.
I don’t know why you are trying to convince me that it’s not rigged, i know it for a fact that it is lol, a simple test for prove can be done by anyone, try play more then 1 hero or deck and you will see the meta suddenly changes when you play different decks
Every week over ten million games of Hearthstoneare played. To think that you, working alone, could see any meaningful portion of the meta is laughable. Only hundreds of players working together to combine data into a large enough sample size could have any kind of a big picture view. There is no experiment you can conduct yourself.
The meta doesn’t change when you switch deck archetypes. Only the tiny fraction of the meta you see. More accurately, your previous opponent played one archetype and your current opponent is playing another, that’s it. Two millionths of today’s meta.
Majority can see it most people just don’t care enough to talk about it, even the top streamers know it’s rigged but obviously they can’t talk about it so they don’t get to blizzards bad side and lose giveaway rewards etc
It applies to both. Blizzard has 100% control over matchmaking because all decisions are implemented by deterministic programming Blizzard implemented. You’re acting as if feeding a variable data set into such programming somehow means that variance is partially controlling the matchmaking, but this is false. Blizzard programs do 100% of the matchmaking and make 100% of the matchmaking choices.
Let’s say there was a human who, by some magic, literally couldn’t disobey me, or do anything other than what I explicitly said, and I instructed them to kill the richest man in the world, which they then did successfully. I’d be 100% in control of that even if I wasn’t responsible for the richest man’s wealth, and/or if I didn’t know who the richest man in the world was (and IRL I don’t lol) but I instructed the robot on how to determine that.
You don’t even know what rigged means. The legal definition is something that is set up unfairly favoring 1 side. Blizzard setting up Match Making to find 50/50 match ups based on MMR is not rigged. It’s not favoring 1 player over the other. It trying to get you as close to 50/50 as possible so it’s looking to make fair match ups where neither side is the favored side.
What is seen with each game of Standard is less than one millionth of the Standard meta. Everybody sees that small amount, but what keeps the majority quiet is the wisdom of knowing, or at least suspecting, how little they know.
Seriously, go to HSReplay dot com and look at how many Standard games they’re recording. And that’s not even including the games they’re not recording, like… any game where both players are using Android phones.
If you play one hundred games, you’ve seen less than 0.1% of today’s Standard, and you think that leads to reliable conclusions. Hubris and apophenia — nothing more.
(Because I know you won’t look up apophenia, it’s “a human propensity to unreasonably seek patterns in random information,” according to Wikipedia.)
This has gone way beyond the scope of what I said: “Blizzard only has so much control with the MMR system since it is player versus player (not player versus Blizzard AI).” Blizzard can certainly match us against one another but they cannot control what we do in that match.
You post a link saying Blizzard themselves says its rigged. The link says they match based on Rank or MMR. Then you say something else entirely based on confirmation bias when you are proven wrong. You sir are full of crap.
"Once other players run out of star bonuses, matching by rank will allow for good players, or players who want to push themselves a bit, to be able to progress to a higher rank. " it doesnt specify its MMR only in the text
The version I find first looking it up is: manage or conduct (something) fraudulently so as to produce a result or situation that is advantageous to a particular person. This would apply to the claim that Blizzard is matchmaking based on deck content when they say that they don’t. So it’s not that they don’t understand what rigging means, it’s that they’re claiming rigging where there is nowhere near sufficient evidence to justify the belief that rigging exists.
Where does Blizzard say anything about your deck archetype changing the matchups. The link says 2 match making pools based on either MMR or Rank. Neither of those pool care about your deck. You are imagining things.