Mind you; I dont believe the matching is unfair. I think it treats every player the same.
But yeah; in eight years I have more than established that one thing to my own satisfaction.
If you change your cards, you change what classes and decks you face.
3 Likes
I never said it was unfair, im just saying that there is an algorithm in the game, yes everyone gets the same bs from the algorithm but it still exists. The biggest prove is just like i said in OP and also what you described, all my friends experience the same thing too
My deck has literally over 70% win rate in wild. And even when I faced a counter deck the opponent had bad draws and lost.
Maybe just admit that bad decks will lose against most other decks and every match against any decent deck seems like a counter.
1 Like
Thereâs absolutely no doubt the matchmaking is rigged, Iâm just not sure the extent of it. Itâs certainly more than just rank.
2 Likes
In what way? Some classes are more popular than others. By making you face all classes equally, they are rigging they game instead of the other way around.
Deck composition plays a major factor in getting Duels treasures that best supplement your strategy. The game knows what sort of strategy your deck is going to lean towards and will give you choices based on native cards. Similar rules may have been applied to Constructed matchmaking as well.
I donât understand what all the fuss is with some people in the forum getting worked up over other players getting frustrated with and making angry threads and claims about matchmaking. Itâs true that most angry threads are repetitive, and their posters often fail recognise their flawed approach to, or their inexperience and lack of skill at, the game. They consider their experience as irrefutable and objective truth because they are incognisant of selective and confirmation biases they have, and are unable to differentiate what constitutes a statistic and what doesnât.
Regardless of whether the matchmaking is âriggedâ or not, itâs true that it has a set of parameters for selection that we donât know about. What we know for certain is that itâs not random, such that it would not be wrong or disingenuous to say it has been âtempered withâ or has skewed distribution.
1 Like
What does terrible mean? Itâs a matchmaker. Either itâs fair or it isnât.
You donât think that this speaks more to your skill than matching?
The treasure system is duels is not that complicated, while the constructed matchmaking system would require insane amounts of calculation to even remotely influence People often use cards like Zephrys to suggest that the game somehow knows counters to your deck when reality itâs just a bunch of if statements like:
if mana = 5 and enemyminioncount > 5 offer brawl or if mana = 0 and enemyminimumlowesthealth <= 2 offer backstab
The treasure system is similar:
using statements like if dragonsindeck > 2 offer dragonbucket or if secretsindeck > 2 offer secretbucket
And sometimes it doesnât even work and give you the wrong buckets. Even the built in data sort AI with the group learning bucket still offers bad cards.
The composition of standard decks far more complex, with a million different variations and some decks being slightly favored, some decks being strict counters, and some decks being neither. And one or two cards can make a huge difference to decks in terms of matchups.
Some classes and decks are more popular than others. And if your deck is weak against these popular decks, you might be seeing a lot of counter decks, but that is just the nature of the meta. Randomness does not guarantee that you always face a even number of each class and deck.
I know you to be a really good player Flag.
I would say your skill is capable of overriding most matching.
Some people believe more than just the MM is being manipulated.
A 70% win rate should literally be impossible is everything is decided by an algorithm to ensure win rates remain close to 50%.
I think that is silly. The system seems really impartial to me.
I just think there is more to the matching than We are allowed to see is all.
1 Like
That may be an important factor, combined with the fact that the deck I play in wild is also insanely powerful and unstoppable.
Balance patches (which they already do) is a far easier way for them to make money and influence the meta at the same time without the heavy cost of rigging the game with some magical program that doesnât exist.
Different classes and decks have different popularity. It is completely natural that you face more of some than others. You might just remember the few times that you switched decks and faced a few unfavorable matchups, and locked it into your memory through bias.
Thatâs the problem though. People are making assumptions based on their experience (mostly negative experiences from the sound of it).
Your personal experience is telling you that the MM is a tad off from what you are being told. The frog I quoted believes everything is manipulated.
Poor starting hand? Algorithm
Opponent top decks? Algorithm
Bad matchup? Algorithm
There is literally nothing in this game he will attribute a loss to other than an algorithm.
2 Likes
The MMR is quite broken in that it can literally give you opponents that are far more or less skilled/competitive.
I remember facing a really powerful Legend-level deck that the opponent played really well in Bronze, and facing a really weak beginner-level deck where the opponent played very badly in Diamond.
But card detection, intentional manipulation of deck order and the like does not exist. Loot boxes, pack opening addiction, balance patches, designing broken cards and the like is how Blizzard and many game publishers actually make money.
Iâve made legend a few times, but will only really play ranked when I find a fun deck. The rewards are really not worth the time investment otherwise IMO. So I donât know if my MMR reflects my actual skill. Any decent amount of time off from ranked play will make me a worse player on ladder. Any time I start playing a new deck, regardless of my current rank, there will of course be a learning period where I butcher the decks win rate. Even the best players in the world can play poorly. Itâs hard to see the true worth of an opponent over a computer screen.
MMR is a bad system for a card game with a lot of variance to begin with.
I think I agree. The rank system seems better overall, but still has many flaws. While I donât love the current system, I donât really hate it. My only huge gripe atm is when you see posts from time to time of returning and new players who face top tier decks and feel helpless.
Not sure if the MMR part of the current system is fully to blame for that part, but itâs just a bad experience that really shouldnât exist.
Not really sure what other kind of system would be better overall.
Its not purely mmr. It actively looks for some one who has won vs your class in your âmmr rangeâ if youâre on a win streak or some one who has just lost against your class if your on a losing streak. Thats why it seems like your getting hard counters (and mirrors when they cant find someone), because they are trying to keep everyone at 50%, now just because that person just beat your class is no guarantee they will beat you. If you manage to win it moves you up in mmr and looks for another person who just beat your class in the new higher mmr pool. thats why there are floors and also different matchmaking ârulesâ at the highest levels.
1 Like
Control Warrior and Quest Warrior
Ramp Druid and Taunt Druid
Shadow Priest and Miracle Priest
Burn Shaman and Aggro Shaman
A class that just beat your class is no guarantee to be placed into a bad matchup. A bunch of classes have several popular decks atm, each with a very different matchup spread.
This also doesnât line up with other people who suggest everything else is rigged too. Mulligans, discovers, RNG effects and card draws to name a few. Or the people who believe the specific cards in your deck define MM, which is why they never face weapon based decks after adding vipers. Thoughts?