How sure are you? Gonna need citation for this.
1 Like
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Null_hypothesis
1 Like
Wow! Does not say anything game-related though. Gonna need a more definitive citation.
2 Likes
It doesn’t have to say anything specific to games, or Hearthstone. That you can’t put two and two together is not my problem.
That you cannot understand and provide what I’m looking for is definitely not my problem. 
1 Like
Developer insight on how players are matched, Year of the phoenix announcement saying that players will be matched using MMR, Blue post answering questions about matchmaking and explaining that the description of MMR in Battlegrounds similarly applies to Ranked. I wish we had access to the old forums because Jesse (the old community manager there) had on multiple occasions confirmed the same thing I’m telling you now.
“Players are paired using MMR”, is the official explanation, hence it is the status quo. Any claim to the contrary is laden with the burden of proof. As Madmax brought up, the “status quo” (that is, the set of likelihoods and distribution of games/draws that you’d expect from the system that Blizz claims) serves as the null hypothesis of whatever experiment you perform to test the randomness of the game.
2 Likes
So rigging isn’t rigging when explained in an official post?
2 Likes
My point is that there is little to no evidence for rigging in the manner that a number of players here suggest. I never said “game isn’t rigged”, only that “if you believe something is happening that the devs haven’t said is happening or said isn’t happening, you are the one laden with the burden of proof and not the skeptics who oppose you. There is no reason to take your opinion seriously until you fulfill that burden of proof”, and that opinion stands here.
4 Likes
Gonna need citation on these.
1 Like
https://us.forums.blizzard.com/en/hearthstone/t/random-or-rigged/
Here ya go, hopefully this fills your quota.
1 Like
Ran out of constructive things to add? Shame. 
1 Like
I could say the same of you .
tbh I’m just tired of the conversation. I’ve made my position abundantly clear and the opinions of the “game is rigged” side are right here and known to be contrary to what Blizzard has claimed. The burden of proof is on them, and if they want any out of most players to believe them then they’ll need to fulfill that burden. That’s about all there is to it.
3 Likes
Gonna need citation for this… and the ones before as well…
1 Like
le sigh
2 Likes
So personal experience isn’t important?
2 Likes
You know what? I’ll just provide a source on the matter, seeing as you seem to enjoy asking for those:
When evidence is contradictory to predicted expectations, the evidence and the ways of making it are often closely scrutinized (see experimenter’s regress) and only at the end of this process is the hypothesis rejected: this can be referred to as ‘refutation of the hypothesis’. The rules for evidence used by science are collected systematically in an attempt to avoid the bias inherent to anecdotal evidence.
It’s all laid out here. People inherently suck at finding patterns and wind up inherently biased, so anecdotal evidence is (rightfully) never taken seriously in matters like this one.
3 Likes
Look up the bullet galaxy and the other ways we have measured dark matter. It’s an interesting subject.
“We have an algorithm that runs in the background that pushes all decks towards a 50% win rate”
This is by definition “rigging”
if you are using a means other that standard MMR to “push” my deck into a matchup where it is NOT favored to win, then you have effectively “rigged” the game.
3 Likes
But it is what blizz acts on. The experience you claim isn’t taken seriously is what these expansions and changes address.
Blizz mostly acts on the data they collect (I believe I already provided the source on this too) and very rarely the subjective concerns of the playerbase.
More importantly, the basis that Blizz uses for balance patches and expansion design is quite literally unrelated to the topic at hand. When it comes to scientific endeavors and determining whether something is true or not (e.g. whether the game is rigged), there’s a scientific process that is generally followed (as I’ve laid out and sourced) that seeks to minimize the impact of personal anecdotes and instead follows the most logical path to truth. A burden of proof is placed on the party that opposes the status quo, and if that burden isn’t satisfied then there’s no reason to take that party seriously.