That’s like saying you can’t comment about auto repair in any discussion that touches on it.
Given how you routinely use cheap shots online, it’s more than likely you were less than professional with your employee. Then claimed you were anything but. Just like when you are called out when doing the same here.
Person who routinely engages in threatens people with post flagging (confusing the flag feature with the long removed “dislike” button), now falsely accuses other of using bot armies to do the dirty tactics he engages in.
Not really. It shows the pattern wasn’t random (the whole point), and that the investigation was thrown off by the manipulation of the person who had done it. Because true randomness is just that. Someone trying to make something look random, especially to cover their tracks, will often make the same mistake.
The point is that it was a desperate pretense at randomness. And we’re considering a character who is supposed to have the vocabulary to elegantly make the distinction.
It’s easy to dispel this idea. Rigging the game would take effort, AKA spending money. Blizzard would not spend money on rigging the game against you because they have nothing to gain. Therefore, what you experienced was variance. The end…
I absolutely agree with this, but I think it’s simpler than that. It costs money to program a system that’s rigged. Why would they bother ruining 1 persons playing experience. 1 player that they don’t even care exists that is lol
Did it ever occur to you that precisely because most of your matchups became Sludge Lock you got the idea to try it? That would explain your situation. It’s sort of a “representative bias” example
You see 10 sludge locks in a row, and you join them. What else do you expect to play against if people play only that for the last couple of hours in your rank?
The thing you’re trying to explain by “rigging” actions and motivations is in itself an explanation - for a question you never asked, which is:
“Why did I even choose to try Sludge Lock at exactly that time?”
It’s crucial to learn to pose critical questions. Judging by the questions you’re posing, you’re very far from that.
“Nah bro you don’t understand, one guy by himself can simulate 30 factorial possibilities no problem on a toaster, so creating a self aware Skynet that can systematically persecute all the real gamers like me is easy peasy”
All these conspiracy theories inevitably grant the supposed conspirators godlike powers. In truth no one gives Blizzard more credit than the rigging believers
My replies are appearing in the wrong forum posts, like they’re all over the place:rofl: All these conversations look dumb lol. Yet nothing has changed
You know what’s the biggest proof that Blizzard didn’t rig the game? They haven’t been caught yet, because there’s no way they wouldn’t screw that up.
Same way I know that the Clinton campaign didn’t have Seth Rich killed. We’re talking about the same lady who couldn’t successfully hide an email server
Unfortunately not, either, I’m dumbly responding in several posts (not impossible ) or the responses aren’t working properly. I’m messaging the moderators somewhere I’ve now lost where… WTH is going on tl;dr forum is broke
the whole exercise was to make Clarice figure that out herself. Obviously, he had the information and/or could figure it out, which was the entire reason her boss sent her there in the first place. It’s almost like you didn’t see the movie.
Obviously, they spend it to make it. And by their quarterlies, which while down still have them making billions a year…show it’s still working.
And this is how these threads get off track: taking the patent, an established fact, along with how it’s evolved since the diablow debacle, another established fact…and these strawmen that would make the scarecrow look like hawking.
diablow says otherwise.
I always love robberies where nothing of value gets stolen.
If they were just random robbers AND Rich was the leaker, all of the evidence actually lines up. He doesn’t think they’re muggers, he thinks they’re assassins, so he doesn’t just go along, he fights back and gets shot. But he doesn’t die right away, they scram because guns are loud and they don’t want to be caught, and he lives until the ambulance gets there but around then he succumbs to his wounds. Note that if they were assassins they should have made sure he was dead before leaving.
Unironically I believe that the reason he died is because he believed the same dumb crap about the Clintons that you do, and decided to go walking home in a heck hole city like DC.
It’s a Call of Duty patent with ZERO applications for ranked play.
Parents do not evolve.
You haven’t read the patent. You can’t tell me what exactly it does. I actually do know because I’ve read it. Prove me wrong or stop talking about stuff you don’t actually know anything about, except what you read from some Kotaku “journalist.”
People still rob you after they harm you. Robberies where nothing of value (or nothing period) is taken are really, really rare.
Funny, I didn’t say I believed anything. I just pointed out that:
matchmaking patent, with examples given from call of duty.
Probably not, but we’re talking about patents. And we’re talking about the technology and how it’s employed. Which clearly improved and was fine tuned for its use in diablow.
Projection, the post.
The deflections from the “muh it never works except the way we say it does, and we say it’s never used, they just filed it” or some such hogwash.
I never even mentioned kotaku. Funny how those who are so scared of the topic being explored get all bent out of shape the more this is discussed.
As I’ve said in the other thread about this, the one where I came up with 3 categories of possible algorithms, that patent is a marketing one.
Matchmaking is still the same, more or less, since you still have to be faced against opponents of equal strength; they’re just less random now because of the additional variables (microtransactional ones) xD
I’m not even sure that marketing schema guarantees higher in-game purchases of targetted items, but that’s a different story.
The point is that you ARE NOT discussing it. You won’t nail down exactly what it does in detail. Because what it does is extremely underwhelming. That’s what’s frustrating about this conversation: you mention the patent as if it has implications, but you refuse to be anything other than vague. Enough of that crap. Explain specifically what it does.
Yet you and others get so bent out of shape over people posting it’s being used by the company to manipulate matchmaking in the very manner laid out in the very documents you linked.
The additional variable in the matchmaking system according to that patent is History of previous purchases (microtransactions).
History of previous purchases doesn’t have anything to do with win rate/results of individual matchups, at least not in theory. How is the skin you’re carrying for your weapon influencing your skill, teammates and luck?
It might have a very, very tiny psychological/visual effect which influences it, but it’s too little to notice without an advanced study done, and it’s nothing of practical significance. It’s covered by the “variance” and randomness.
Now, in Hearthstone, things aren’t that clear-cut. In Hearthstone, the two variables (history of previous purchases and current win rate) TEND TO BE positively correlated, for the simple reason that the longer you’re playing, the higher the odds of you making purchases in-game as well as higher your skill should be.
So, I can understand how some people can confuse that correlation for a global conspiracy. It all adds up in my framework.
) or the responses aren’t working properly. I’m messaging the moderators somewhere I’ve now lost where… WTH is going on 
tl;dr forum is broke