thats only if the guy you last played is using the same deck 
1 Like
Originally the blog post said player and class and regardless of it now being revised, folks are going to hang on to that until the end of time.
3 Likes
so i guess they dont play the game or they wouldve noticed right after update you could be matched against the same class in a row
1 Like
Please provide the quote where Ben Broke is “admitting literally THAT”. I have a feeling that he actually “admitted” nothing of the sort.
It’s been stated by numerous Dev’s that they like us around 50%
You have Google too, right?
(Honestly, do I need to provide footnotes like Wiki’s?)
Google this, this is on You Tube Designer Insights with Ben Brode: Purify
He clearly states the dream is to have every class have multiple archetypes at 50% win rates.
Seeing google can’t find it it is likely you can not either.
Sad an old guy can use the interweb better than the kiddies. But that’s the trick you kids play on us. Make your moms and dads do everything for you, then laugh at us for being so dumb as to do so.
And on average, we’re close. Not individually, but in aggregate data.
Some folks are 60%
Some folks are 65%
Some folks are 70%
Some folks are 40%
Most folks are greater than 50% until they hit their performance ceiling, then sit aroind that level once they get there. They sure weren’t 50% on the way to that rank/legend/casual mmr though.
I could go on, but I think you get the idea.
Good info, but I was addressing something different.
You know what, I completely forgot that this was even my thread so when you replied to it I got a notification and thought you were replying directly to me lol.
Yeah, Blizzard devs for both this and other games have said that they see a 50% winrate as a sweet spot of sorts once someone has hit their skill (though I’d say performance) ceiling.
Some folks choose to take that as something they engineer towards behind the scenes, but regardless of interpreted implications, it’s definitely been said and personally I agree with such a philosophy. It’s why we have an MMR system in the first place.
When a player uses language like “admitting”, with an implication that the devs have been caught hiding something and are being forced to own up to it, then yes; that player needs to provide evidence.
Nobody at Blizzard has ever “admitted” that they were artificially forcing players to have a 50% win rate, which is what this stupid “50% winrate” paranoia is all about. They use “50% win rate” as short hand for “all decks are winning about the same amount relative to each other and therefore they’re roughly balanced against each other”. Their fault is in believing that players always understand what they mean instead of latching onto a number that “explains” why that player isn’t in Legend bracket.
He clearly states the dream is to have every class have multiple archetypes at 50% win rates.
And where, exactly, does he admit to manipulating player matches to achieve this ideal game balance? Because if all he’s saying is that they want the game to be balanced, then he’s not actually “admitting literally” anything, is he?
It’s not the best forum here.
In order to get the whole story you need to do a lot of work going back and back and back and back to find out what someone was referring to.
I didn’t realize you were focusing on the “rigged” comment.
I think it’s best if people used the “old fashioned” quoting method where it shows all relevant posts, even if it can take up a whole page (even tho pages dont exist anymore)
You can still quote, both by highlighting for specific cuts or hitting the little speech bubble next to the bold and italicize buttons to import the entire post you’re replying to into a quote box. That replicates the old way.
1 Like
riiiiiiiiiight the guy who ive seen on the forums for years didnt know that 50% quote been used by the tin foil club all this time
1 Like
Not system without its flaws, though.
Obviously a fake quote…more of a paraphrase
1 Like
Very true, thankfully in the case of quoting unedited posts (no pencil icon) the tampering becomes quite evident.
2 Likes
Huh, cool, I actually didn’t know clicking on it did that.
Ultimately I really think this brushes up very closely to what this whole “rigged” conspiracy theory nonsense boils down to.
Hearthstone’s developers set up a system. The systems they put in place try to match players in such a way as to give them an opponent that is close to their historical overall performance level. The end result of such a system is that player will TEND to have around a 50% win rate. People will have better (or worse) win rates than 50% … but in the overall statistical analysis that will be what typically happens.
Now - people are really Really REALLY stupid when it comes to understanding basic statistical analysis. I can’t complain about that. If people weren’t so stupid about stats then I’d have to find a new job. But it’s threads like this that comfort me with the knowledge that I’ll never be out of work because the world is so full of incompetent dunderheads that couldn’t stat their way out of a wet paper bag.
So what we have in this thread are a few people who - in complete ignorance of any actual facts or data - are drawing the most moronic conclusions possible about how Blizzard’s systems work. And they assert their moronic conclusions with the same kind of ignorance-fueled ontological certitude you hear from AOC when she talks about basic economics. They know just enough information to barely know anything at all … draw a specious conclusions based on that shred of information and bias … close their minds and ears … and scream their nonsense thoughts on the topic at full volume until the end of time.
Blizzard assumed when they built their systems that the world wasn’t full of self-deluded, biased idiots who fly as high as a kite snorting their own gaseous emissions. The people in this forum who believe in “rigged matchmaking” are here to conclusively prove just how wrong they were.
1 Like