Mathematical PROOF that Standard Ladder is Rigged

I know this really is an irrelevant topic…but I still think we have a right to know. I am a Statistician by trade, with over 15 years of experience crunching p-values and t-tests. So I decided to run a statistics experiment to test my theory. I would encourage anyone to repeat my experiment and see if you get similar result.

Procedure: I climbed to Rank 5 using a Pally Murloc Deck. I rapidly ascended to this rank, and then, of course, ran into the Void lord and Cubelocks. Earlier than rank 5, I got a fairly even mix of opponents, but because the Cubelock is dominating right now, I expected to see more of them at the higher ranks. So…I changed one card in my deck. ONE CARD. I swapped out a knife juggler for a Defias Cleaner to get an extra silence tech. I was already running 2 spellbreakers, so this card had no purpose other than to silence a voidlord.

I immediately noticed the ladder was not facing me against cubelocks anymore. Since I couldn’t lose stars at that rank, I started a game, and if it wasn’t a warlock, I just conceded. It literally took me 17 games to even face a warlock…and the deck was a ZOO build…NOT Cubelock. It took me 26 concessions to find a cubelock to go against…because I changed one card to counter that deck,

I repeated that experiment every 3 hours…just to allow some new players to come on and off.

I used 26 matches as my standard candle. (No pun unintended)

Trial 1 : 3.8% chance of facing cubelock

Trial 2: 4.0% chance of facing cubelock

Trial 3: 4.2% chance of facing cubelock

Average: With deck holding 3 silences, instead of 2…the chance of facing cubelock was 4.0%

OPPOSITION EXPERIMENT:

I took the Defias Cleaner out, and put my knife juggler back in.

Again standard candle of 26 games at Rank 5:

Trial 1: 73.2 % chance of facing cubelock

Trial 2: 57.6% chance of facing cubelock

Trial 3: 69.2% chance of facing cubelock

Average 66.6% chance of facing cubelock.

Remember, this is a sampling of over 150 games, 75 WITH a 3rd Silence (No Cubelocks), and 75 with only 2 Silences (Many Cubelocks)

By changing ONE card in my deck, the likelihood that I would face the deck it was DESIGNED to beat went down by a factor of 4.5. When I removed that one card, the likelihood I would face that same deck went UP by a factor of 4.

As a further test, I took out a card and added a Ravenholdt Assassin, which has the same stats as a Defias Cleaner, but no silence. I saw ZERO change in the amount of cubelocks I was facing with the card, but did only run one trial.

So right now, Pally, Priest, and Warlock, and hunter are the classes to beat. You would think you would see them on average every four games, with a couple randoms thrown in.

But based on switching out ONE card…and running hundreds of trials I found my chance of facing a cubelock DROPPED 62% when I put in a tech card to counter it. One Single Card…the Defias Cleaner.

I implore someone to recreate my experiment. If Blizzard is fudging the latter, we need to know about it.

“Paranoid Player”

2 Likes

Where’s the proof? Did you record it with deck trackers so we can see the replays?

He’s been a statistician for 15 years, of he recorded his data in a way it can be reviewed.

I’m guessing all modes are all like this, Ive fought hunter ~13 out of my last 20 matches using mage. I wonder if it’s like fortnite and cod…when pay real money, get advantage for a month…they hide it but I proved it and other proof is on youtube.

I already made an experiment like this. But I did not think that different cards changed anything, I tought it was only the class you used.

You can record what classes and decks you face agains when using one class and then you change, you get different opponents, even in the same rank.

The matchmaking considers what you are using when choosing your opponent.