No and you know im right
Your confirmation bias is your enemy. Everyone who believes something wrong and who seeks to be proven even more right, unfortunately succeeds in strengthening their incorrect beliefs.
If you want to be wise, seek to be proven wrong.
1 Like
Remember these games where you play weapon rogue and you cant find the weapon from deck even after rotating all trades and cards and when the game is ending you see they are both the last 2 cards in the deck? thats called algorithm making you lose.
Or when you play kazakusan druid and guff is the last card in the deck for 4 games in row after you won 2 games, its not random, its the algorithm ensuring you wont win too much
1% of the time both Shanks will be in the bottom 4 cards.
2.5% of the time (1 in 40) theyâll be in the bottom 6 cards.
5% of the time (1 in 20) theyâll be in the bottom 8 cards.
10% of the time theyâll be in the bottom 11 cards.
20% of the time, theyâll both be in the bottom 16 cards (essentially, the bottom half of the deck).
The above is assuming hard mulligan for Shank.
Thatâs not an algorithm. Thatâs just randomness.
Whatâs it like living in a world of naivety?
Also what you are doing is called a strawman.
You donât need to be a software developer to understand how they can use algorithms to rig the matchmaking.
They were already caught that Overwatch has a 50% matchmaking system to artificially keep peoples winrates as close to 50/50 as possible.
Most likely to keep you playing longer.
Literally every system that matches players according to similar skill levels does this. Thatâs not rigging, thatâs just matching you against worthy opponents.
1 Like
There is evidence and itâs already been proven that Overwatch has 50% matchmaking, what makes you think they wouldnât mess with things in other Blizzard games?
You are dishonest in asking him for evidence when you know the only way to âprove the algorithmâ would be Blizzard to release the code which they arenât going to do.
You are confusing me for someone else.
The same joker that I am laughing at.
You didnât read what I wrote. Every single game has â50% matchmakingâ if it matches according to skill level. Itâs not a shocking admission. What youâre saying is like saying Hitler drank water so donât drink water.
No the game is supposed to have peopleâs skill determine where they end up.
Not try to artificially force people towards a 50% matchmaking by giving people with low winrates stacked teams and giving people with high winrates awful teams of new players.
One is intentionally handicapping people the other is an even matchmaking system.
To break that down a little bit clearer:
If youâre a below average player and you were matched completely randomly, youâd usually be paired against opponents of higher skill than you. If youâre matched by skill level instead, youâll usually get a relatively easier opponent, improving your odds of winning the match. Because youâre below average and average winrate is 50%, this matchmaking brings your winrate closer to 50%.
If youâre an above average player and you were matched completely randomly, youâd usually be paired against opponents of lower skill than you. If youâre matched by skill level instead, youâll usually get a relatively harder opponent, decreasing your odds of winning the match. Because youâre above average and average winrate is 50%, this matchmaking brings your winrate closer to 50%.
So the answer to âdoes the matchmaking algorithm bring winrates closer to 50%?â is yes. But thatâs true for every game that matches according to skill, which is pretty close to saying itâs true for every PvP game period. Itâs not sinister and itâs not evidence of matchmaking on the basis of anything other than skill.
By the way, it doesnât really matter who is on your team, as long as your equally skilled counterpart is on the enemy team and each of your teammates has an equally skilled counterpart on the enemy team as well.
1 Like
You think Iâm making strawmen but actually your brains are just nothing but straw, given your arguments.
Donât dodge the questions I asked. What were those meetings like? Those function names. The comments in the code. The cards in Jira. The emails sent to legal.
You say you donât need to be a software developer to get it, but you sure make it seem like you need to be to understand because you clearly do not.
I play Overwatch too, and the matchmaker sure DOES NOT fanatically balance teams to âforce 50% winrateâ. It places you in matches appropriate to your rank, and thatâs all it does. And even then it cuts corners at high ranks to keep queue times down.
3 Likes
IDK why you guys are arguing. the maching is crappy. Thatâs not even a question.
Crappy how? Give details.
I have already said all Iâm gonnaâ. This conversation should have ended eons ago.
Jesus, dude.
It is not.
It is you salty about losing. Period. Thatâs it.
Youâre old enough to know better.
2 Likes
I donât give a toss about losing, other than my class being bottom tier, or being nerfed to bottom tier every single expansion.
And you have known me long enough to know that.
âJesusâ is right, because this has basically become a theological discussion.
2 Likes
The only argument they have is " salty because of losing " but nobody here is talking about losing, we are talking about matchmaking, hearthstone matchmaking is extremely algorithmed
Yes, I did. I did a test of 10 matches without Vipers and then 10 matches with Vipers and posted the results. Adding Vipers had no impact on the opponents I faced. How do you explain that? Other than the fact that class/deck/cards are not a factor in matchmaking.
Oh⌠so thatâs how this is going to work. Youâll just call any data that doesnât support your narrative fake news and just stick with your misguided gut feelings based on misinformation, bad data collection, and a misunderstanding of the systems involved. Sounds like a crazy Trumpanzee at a Dumb Donald rally. 
