Rigging would not make Blizzard more money. Players donât like being cheated and they donât like being frustrated. Every single time thereâs a thread like this, the people who believe in rigging say stuff like
so if people who believe Blizzard is rigging spend nothing and rigging is
then the only thing that would be accomplished by rigging is pissing off the playerbase and driving away potential pack sales. Which is why Blizzard doesnât do it.
You have to choose one: either rigging is subtle enough where the vast majority will never know it exists â while we live in a world of social media where any scandal can go viral â or rigging is not profitable. One or the other, or both.
Op has already fantastically explained what is happening but you just dont seem to be able to understand it / or living with too much denial, also you can have the same results when you try it yourself
It figures that someone who blames their losses on the game being rigged thinks the average person is devoid of thought. May I suggest an alternative hypothesis: youâre not all that clever, the average player is roughly as intelligent as you are, and the really smart ones are much, much smarter than you.
As you may have noticed from another thread, I did the Alterac mysteries achievement yesterday. I recommend you try that out yourself using the guides available online, not because of the mysteries themselves but because of the strength of the guides relative to the difficulty of the puzzles. Hearthstone players are incredibly smart and can reverse engineer complex systems in a matter of days. Carielâs maze was live, what, 24 hours before a full solution, and you think rigging wouldnât be cracked in years?
Quite simply, youâre wrong about them: people arenât idiots. Donât get me wrong, theyâre not geniuses, but you need to have a realistic feel for what will fool 100 IQ and what wonât, and to what degree intelligence of target even matters when it comes to persuasion.
I never claimed that players are stupid, you are reading what you want, i said that people dont give the game analyzing thoughts when they play it, they just look up a deck and que up and play few games a day max so of course these people wont ever see that the matchmaking isnt normal because they simply dont play enough
Last I checked âthoughtlessâ was a synonym for stupid. But I get you know, youâre not saying they donât think at all, youâre saying that they arenât thinking about how things are ârigged against them.â
You donât play enough. You do not have a large enough sample size to detect any meaningful pattern. Remember, it needs to be subtle enough that the guys who mapped Carielâs maze canât unravel its secrets. Iâm sorry, but youâre not smarter than them. So if rigging is real, itâs too subtle for you to see it, period. Which means your perception that itâs obvious is actually cognitive dissonance.
It is physically impossible for you to play enough. Only data aggregator websites âplayâ enough, and they donât see any of what you believe exists.
i would not define thoughtless this way.
Insensitive, inconsiderate, are the things that come to mind for me.
I have never used it as an analogue for stupid.
If rigged means it produces different matchmaking results for one player over another when they present the same same variables, then it is not rigged.
If rigged means it is a system that is not pure random for your rank and uses variables to match you to keep your win rate close to 50%, then it is rigged.
The matchmaking system clearly looks at variables, such as class your playing, some form of win streak, maybe even certain meta combinations or decks. It does this equally for all players, but still produces âriggedâ matches based on the matchmaking criteria. It does not appear to produce âriggedâ matches that treats one player differently than another in the same circumstance.
You say clearly. What evidence have you got in the way of backing up your claim?
One of the strategies of liars and people arguing in bad faith is exactly this. Make bold, certain claims to try and rile up backing from people looking to have their views backed.
Never any evidence, though. Just anedoctes and falacies.
i havenât been posting to this forum for long, but iâve read it for years. i understand all of the claims made by both sides, and honestly i am left with this question at the end of the day.
how would a ânon-riggedâ matchmaking algorithm appear different from the âriggedâ one we use now?? this is the part i donât understand, because i feel the same anomalies would be prevalent, because no one can see the whole meta in real time, and statistically someone will see a match-up spread that is âwonky.â so wouldnât it always devolve to some portion of the community feeling itâs fixed and others feeling itâs not because weâll all have different experiences?