Your card draw algorithms and matchmaking algorithms, that your manipulate to make the game “more exciting” are the reason people keep quitting season after season.
It’s been clear for years that you manipulate matchmaking to match players by decks and counters. This is why when you playing a certain deck, all your opponents will be playing the same general builds. Blizzard sees this as “competitive matchmaking” when it’s just rigging the game.
Blizzard also employs card weighting to ensure that certain cards are drawn less frequently as well as how often cards appear in your starting hand. They call this “balance” when again it’s just rigging the game to keep people falsely engaged and increase game length. This also allows for those “miracle moments” when Blizzard want’s to give you that dopamine hit that keeps you playing after 2-3 lost games.
Stop manipulating the game behind the scenes to compensate for your lack of creativity and ability to balance the game. Stop creating troll cards that do nothing but annoy the players at the expense of a cheap thrill. You continue to turn Hearthstone from a skill based game, to being completely at the mercy of the “fake RNG” slot machine.
12 Likes
Yet there are people reaching legend.
RNG (manipulated or not) it’s still part of the game.
Some decks are far too optimized than others. That they can function even with bad RNG.
If you’re losing due to Bad RNG. Then shouldn’t you be asking, are you winning because of good RNG ?
1 Like
Another one of these. Ridiculous topic pushed by people with a ridiculously fragile egos. Next!
6 Likes
Dr. Cox carried that show lol
Then there should be years and years of piles of evidence, yet here we are, just more claims.
2 Likes
I called it. Polarizing matchups are going to make these topics thrive. They were already pretty popular though so i don’t need a cookie or anything.
If someone is giving out cookies, I’d like one! Peanut butter, please
2 Likes
So now you get matched into mirrors instead of counters? One more way of rigging to the pile.
1 Like
Ohhhh I can’t wait for brother Mallenroh to get in on this one! 
Unironically yes, but no “deck scan” algorithm is necessary for this to happen.
Let’s imagine that the people at a certain rating, where they are likely to be matched against each other, are not a perfect even split between paper rock and scissors. Let’s say, for the sake of argument, that they’re disproportionately paper. After one round, that rank will have a bias towards paper (papers tend to draw when paper overrepresented), the rank below will have a bias towards rock (rocks tend to lose when paper overrepresented) and the rank above would have a bias towards scissors (scissors tend to win when paper overrepresented).
So if you ran a simulation of a ranked ladder, using a random seed and a standard “by winrate” matchmaking algorithm, you’d expect ranks to eventually settle into like types - like a rank of mostly rock, with a rank of mostly paper above it, scissors above that, rock above that, etc — and the loop you’d tend to see is:
- Mirror match
- A. The mirror winner is paired against what counters them, and probably loses
B. The mirror loser is paired against what they counter, and probably wins
- Goto 1
All of the above is based on the premise that metas essentially boil down to paper rock scissors. I think they do, even if there’s a few different kinds of paper or whatever. Also, bad matchups in Heartstone aren’t 0-100 so the settling effect is not nearly as clean as it would be in paper rock scissors.
TL;DR: As a meta approaches pure paper rock scissors and matches played approaches infinity, the difference in archetype-vs-archetype pairings between a “deck scan” matchmaking algorithm and a standard winrate based matchmaking algorithm approaches zero.
4 Likes
Human beings instinctively attribute purpose to randomness. While there is no way to prove that matchmaking isn’t rigged the supposed evidence that it is objectively weak and relies heavily on anecdotal evidence.
I mean I would certainly want to know if matchmaking is nefariously “rigged”. Unfortunately there’s no there there.
3 Likes
Let me clarify a few things for all the people not understanding the point of my post. Winning or losing has no impact on my post. The point of my post is that Hearthstone is too predictable and boring as a direct result of Blizzard attempting to manipulate the game.
Being matched against the same 4-5 classes, playing the same deck, every game is boring AF. Now you can make a convincing argument that it’s just because everyone at your MMR is playing the same decks because those are the popular decks. However if matchmaking was purely based on MMR and skill you wouldn’t see completely different opponents just by changing your deck or class. It’s pretty obvious that Blizzard pairs opponents based on decks and the cards in them. Blizzard argues this makes for better gameplay, I argue it makes for boring gameplay. I’m simply asking for a gamemode that is free from Blizzard’s manipulation. Because getting wrecked by some random power deck is just as fun as stomping an opponent into the ground. It’s boring when every single match is the same.
2 Likes
This doesn’t happen. What does happen is that you see different opponents if you win than if you lose, because the matchmaking algorithm is by winrate.
People who believe in all kinds of nonsense that doesn’t exist think that the standard matchmaking algorithm that most games use, and that Blizzard admits to using, is random. It is not random. If you change the win-loss result of that first game, you’ve just changed your next opponent according to the standard matchmaking algorithm. So it’s just the standard matchmaking algorithm at work here, responding nonrandomly to the difference in your win-loss record.
1 Like
I assure you Deck and Cards make up the matchmaking algorithm and is easily trackable in Hearthstone Deck Tracker. You can view your opponents by deck, even down to different versions of decks based on changing one card. Every deck is matched against 4-5 opponent classes of “equal deck strength” and that is all you will face with the occasional outlier (about 6% of matches). I mean it’s so plainly there I thought this was common knowledge. I mean they show it to you in a pie graph LMAO.
So basically Blizzard attempt to make even matches by matching decks of equal strength against each other. This prevents someone from getting lucky and rising up the MMR bracket because their random opponent didn’t have a counter to their deck.
1 Like
Okay you’re not at all getting the difference between ALGORITHM and EFFECT. So let’s see if I can get your brain actually working.
Let’s say that I gave a computer all of the income data from all tax returns in the US. I don’t give it any age data at all. Then I asked this computer to match people according to income.
What we would expect from the results of this matchmaking, is that young people would be matched with young people, and old people with old people, to a degree much more noticeable than if purely random. This is because people have a strong tendency to make higher income as they get older, at least until retirement. So this is an example of an income-based algorithm having a age-based effect.
In the same way, a winrate-based algorithm can have archetype-based effects. You’re all like “ooo ooo there’s a pie chart of the archetype based effect” as if it proves you’re right, it doesn’t. The matchmaking algorithm doesn’t need to look at your deck list at all, for the same reason that I don’t need to look at YOUR choice of paper rock scissors to have a pretty good idea what it is, if I know that you just won against a field that’s mostly paper. It’s probably scissors, no scan required.
3 Likes
Then explain to me why if I play 100 games as a Mech Mage today I will face one distribution of 5 decks/classes, and if I play 100 games as a Blood DK I see a completely different distribution of 5 decks/classes, even though my MMR hasn’t changed?
Oh and then if I switch back to Mech Mage I immediately see the previous 5 decks/classes. I don’t have to be a statistician to read a pie graph.
1 Like
Your MMR changes every. single. game.
4 Likes
Screen shots would be great.
1 Like
We need another James Randi “One Million Dollar Paranormal Challenge” but instead make it " One Million Dollar Rigged Challenge".
We’d likely get the same results: Not a single winner, but everyone still claiming they can prove it.
I really love the little quips like “It’s so clear”. If it’s “so clear” why can’t said people provide the evidence?
4 Likes
*reply pushed be people supporting an actiblizz dev team
is what you were probably going for.
The “typical post from those who act as spokespersons or promoters for the company” is so fast, one can almost set a watch to it!
that’s a funny way of saying the patent exists and is easily located by anyone who take a few minutes to do an internet search!
1 Like
