Proof? I play exclusively off meta decks and i see meta decks as an absolute majority. In fact, i remake decks freequenly and basically never see off meta decks past platinum or so.
God, you people have no compulsion to just affirm whatever as facts to prove a point. It’s incredible, if a little sad.
Killuminati is in bronze 9. BRONZE 9. At the end of the month. First of all people play whatever so low in ranked, second of all could as well be a guy coming back or that doesn’t frequently play lader. If he did, he wouldn’t be at bronze 9.
Its, BY FAR, a more plausible possibility than making up a whole system of rigging. ONE system, by the way, among the ceaseless types people keep saying are the actual rigging system.
1 Like
Haha. To be fair I haven’t played all month and last night I played 2 matches. Maybe 3. I’m trying to “be a guy coming back” but am finding holding interest difficult.
People still debating whether this dumpster fire is rigged? Would be interesting to see how successful these naysayers are irl. With little to no critical thinking skills, life must be hard.
-Picture me rolling-
2 Likes
White Knights ASSEMBLE!! You may only conform with what our beliefs and ideals are or you will be SHAMED!!!
you can look up the patent, it clearly says it there
probably because most of us don’t record games. If you have played more than 5 games then you should be able to see how rigged this game is.
1 Like
lol then why can i play 5 games and 4 of those have the same exact legendary as the very last card or how is it that I can play a deck that has 9 cards that draw a total of 12 cards and always have to wait until the very last 2 cards to draw my combo…not every time but factually about 49/50 times?
1 Like
LOL, yourself. The game is not rigged.
The word for today is “coincidence”; confirmation bias is old news.
Members of the Tin Foil Hat Brigade go on my ignore list.
If you played 5 more after that you would see that it goes both ways and the highs and lows even out and that the game is not rigged.
It’s hilarious seeing all the weeaboos holding on to the blatantly false notion that 1) Hearthstone is a game of skill and 2) the "R"NG is not weighted heavily to those who put forth the most legal tender. The proof of this abounds. It literally permeates everything everywhere this game goes, Just looking at the absolutely consistent behavior of Theotar, The Giggling Mad Duke is proof positive by itself.
2 Likes
Do people actually say this is a game of skill? Setting aside the argument of what aspects (if any) are in any way rigged, do people actually claim that hearthstone is a significantly skill-testing game? The closest I’ve heard anyone say around here is that while any individual game can be ended by a turn 3 highroll, the better player will win more games out of 1000 (which is to say, an extremely low standard for a game having a relevant skill criterion).
1 Like
The “coincidence” is you equal burger flipper. Prove me wrong.
I’d say, like any game, there’s an element of skill involved. Hearthstone may not be as complex as, say, MTG, with essays written on cards. Nevertheless, some players get stuck at gold, for example, while others consistently make it to high legend. There’s a lot of randomness in this game (I don’t know where on the spectrum HS falls compared to other CCGs) and a large time investment is necessary, which a lot of players simply do not have.
How many cards are in your combo? And do you run a 30 or 35 card deck? It may not be all that unlikely for at least one of them to be at or near the bottom of the deck.
Hmm… I must say that I’m a bit skeptical. Can you post any validation of this claim, like the HSReplay of those 50 matches?
Show me. I can’t just accept the “it’s obvious” argument. You’ll need to show me data with sample size around a thousand.
Isn’t his argument an argument from incredulity?
An argument of incredulity is “I don’t understand it, therefore it must not be true”.
“We have no data, so I withhold belief in your claims till proof” is just how thinking should nor ally go.
“Argument from incredulity, also known as argument from personal incredulity, appeal to common sense, or the divine fallacy, is a fallacy in informal logic . It asserts that a proposition must be false because it contradicts one’s personal expectations or beliefs, or is difficult to imagine.”
That isn’t the same as “we have no data, so I withhold belief in your claims”. That’s only logical. When someone’s argument is “it’s obvious”, it’s very akin to the fallacy described above. I mean, it might not be a perfect fit, though nevertheless, it is an illogical argument.
Precisely. It feels like this is happening, so it must be happening… until someone proves that it’s not.
1 Like
ITT: People with an external locus of control who are unable to come to terms with the fact that they consistently make incorrect decisions when playing a relatively simple digital card game.