So, theres a debate between data being and not being accurate.
Here’s a small tip. The data available from VS reports is a very very small portion of the whole data.
Those saying that the data is accurate dont realise the above statement and think it applies to all the data which only Blizzard has.
Those saying the data isnt accurate have personal experiences to back their claims and most likely are being right.
The percentages in the report apply only those that fed data to VS, not to the majority of people.
That being said, anyone can play and have similar or different experiences but the chances are that most likely it wont match the data on VS report unless they are a data feeder.
I dont know if you understand, but cheers anyway.
1 Like
You are assuming that Blizzard collects data at all. You have no evidence for this, other than them collecting data many years ago. They may have downsized those employees.
By “personal experiences” what you mean is data that has a smaller sample size than VS (in most cases) and less properly maintained.
False. Whoever has the largest sample size is usually most accurate.
Here’s the thing.
Blizzard has released its own personal data before for players to see.
VS matched it nearly stat for stat. It was that accurate.
Secondly, VS is fairly consistent on what cards will be nerfed, what is strong, what will see a nerf and what will likely be changed. They get this right a lot of time. So they have a fairly good history of being accurate.
This isn’t because they just look at the data and guess either. They use examples of other players/streamers at high legend and their takes on things as well. Often times, those high legend streamers are right in line with what VS says. This is because of the experience in the meta and playing the games themselves.
Fairly similar to why Zeddy often gets nerf targets spot on. He plays so much and has friends that play and they can see first hand what is strong and what people are complaining about and what is valid.
You combine all those things together and that’s why VS is the most accurate from the other sites. Like I said, Blizzard revealed their internal numbers before and it was pretty astonishing how close VS was.
Now, what VS sucks at is predicting a meta based on card reveals before card power levels are known. They suck like most of the player base sucks. This is why a lot of streamers “compete” on seeing who is the most accurate in predicting the power of all cards and none of them get close to being 100% accurate.
Like how they predicted knickknack shack would be in every rogue deck and it is included in no lists at the moment.
To be fair i dont think i would’ve guessed elven minstrel would be a relevant card in the class either xD. I tried using it a few months back when i saw it was in the core set but it did not feel great like it did when it first came out. Goes to show how good specific tutoring can be even on a card that is relatively slow these days.
2 Likes
Scrottie, i told you a long time ago that you dont understand some things and yet you keep debating without arguments. Let me put it in a way that you may understand.
If you got a car and you make a statement about how its running when you check the trunk or the wheels, and you dont look at the engine, you might be very wrong in your statement.
It’s the same thing with HS, Blizzard has the car and you are looking at the trunk of the car or at the wheels and assume its working as intended, and tbh its more like you’re looking in the exhaust pipe, but thats just a personal opinion.
As for the data, Blizzard does collect it, but as i stated in some other thread, the amount of man power needed to analyze that data is not worth the paycheck, so most likely they dont say anything about it cause nobody knows more than necessary.
Pls learn the difference between absolute and probability before replying to my posts.It feels like im replying to a highschool grader.
2 Likes
You have no evidence that Blizzard collects data. They don’t publish it. That is an argument.
Even if they do collect it, it doesn’t matter from our perspective, so long as they refuse to share it. Data that is not and never will be available to view may as well not exist. This is also an argument.
I know probability, and it has almost nothing to do with what’s going on here. Did you mean statistics?
And I have no idea what you mean by absolute. If what you mean is “a value or principle which is regarded as universally valid” then you should understand that you’re using the word incorrectly here. Even if you disagree with that, please find other words.
Does teh data include all of the I WIN CARDS?!
Accuracy might be the least of the problem when people take VS too seriously; they act as if they saw “the truth”; the truth does not exist even if they had 100% accuracy.
That’s because it’s extremely subjective on HOW you read the data; did you ignore sample sizes of 100 and 200 games unnecessarily; how did you label tier “1” etc.
It’s better to do custom filtering on hsguru; there are multiple ways that give different answers; e.g. sometimes is vital information to filter for only 100 samples.
1 Like
Its so weird I have never seen one once in lengend maybe that part of it and every one I have ran into was climbing to legend on my main and alt account. Only lost 2 one once period but the decks i play cpunter paladin pretty hard too. Most my recent encounters were on DH and most games we over by turn 4.
I believe they just got lucky a few times. Infact vs has been wrong far more times than right in my opinion. I’m starting not to trust most of these data sites data at all. My own intuition has been more accurate in helping me be good at this game, not what these forums say for sure and for sure VS hasnt helped a darn bit. Infact VS has only made things worse. If I still listened to vs like I did when I first started playing, it would never be as good as I am now.
I use Hsguru, and the way I showed you all, I use Hs replay. Those are the only effective tools to help me climb other than getting good and making my decks or my variations of decks. VA has contributed to nothing but losses.
Infact iv found the way I use HS replay to be infinately more valueable and accurate to helping me know what I should be playing IF i want to climb. I see what decks and cards everyone is playing a formulate a deck and strat around it.
Vs is useless unless you just want to play the deck they say is the best and 99% of thats not going to do anything for you. In my experance.
Vs only showes you what decks out of the popular ones with there skewed data are the strongest over all. Then you go and look and see what decks perform well against their “best decks” and see that many meta decks counter it LMFAO.
it just shows that a deck might be 0-1.8% stronger but the way they do there data it could be just a few decks it absolutly stomps making that small %.
VS is a bunch of BS and should be taken with a grain of salt. The amount of data they believe is useless and they omit it assinine.
Also another factor is some decks with skill can perform wildly better than other decks.
Hand buff paladin is verry linear. Skill only effects it so much. Wile decks such as priest can have a significatly higher win rate depending on skill. Paladin is draw and luck-based with next to no skill.
DK right now has a significant skill ceiling. Ik you all might dissagre. But that class has the most diffrent archtypes of decks in the game right now. A high % of them fall into that high skill ceiling.
Skill to me is not just what most of you think. It also involves modification of decks and making your own decks. Optomising them bassed on what your running into and meta shifts as well.
1 Like
Exactly. After 8000 hours (well, that’s a myth, some do it way faster, some way slower, depending on many things) people become experts and their intuition/tacit knowledge extends anything we can describe in words or stats at the moment.
Nothing can replace it, yet.
Bingo.
Honestly if the nerfs have been going of data simular to VS this whole time no wonder the game has been seen in such sorry states.
Most of the time, some slight buffs to other classes or a couple of cards would have fixed everything. But instead, a class or archetype just gets gutted. I still think a few cards need to be perma in the core set.
The Jeuvinline way of thinking " nuke the class off the face of the planet", “anything i loose against is op” has whats been distroying this game.
I hope blizzard chooses to buff cards instead of nerfing anything again.
Its funny too me that this thread is pretty much Altair throwing a tantrum because everyone doesn’t bow down to his Hearthstone supremacy. Dude you have a very fragile ego.
3 Likes
Sounds like your the one butt hurt here to me. Its your ego thats getting hurt.
Hes right about everything hes saying.
Just because you can except the truth does not mean you need to attack him.
If more people thought like him we would have a better game.
1 Like
No I just enjoy watching tryhards cry like babies cause they don’t get enough approval from random people on the internet. Maybe work on real life a little so real people might wanna be around you.
https://i.imgur.com/puuL3B0.jpeg
That statement is both true and not that great for you either. Selfishness is a problem (even for gameplay), but laughing at others for having that problem isn’t that great either; society appears to have a weird acceptance for bullying the bullies; they don’t see the simple fact that’s also bullying.
Kindness costs nothing. I have no idea why so many people are hoarders.
1 Like
While we’re at it, there’s other inconsistencies in VS power ranking tier list.
Until now I haven’t even looked at tier 3 and tier 4 of their list, as I was too focused on what was inconsistent with the strongest and most played decks, but now I’ve found something inexplicable.
Apparently, there was room for Elemental mage on that tier list (top 1k) in tier 4. What bothers me is that the distribution by rank has Elemental mage’s playrate at 0,09% which is 0,0009*total games recorded in top 1k.
Since the total games recorded in top 1k is 75 000, Elemental mage’s sample for this report is 67,5 games.
67,5 games is 4 times lower than what i had on sludgelock. I thought the minimum games recorded to make it into their report was 1000 games, but apparently it’s not, so why is elemental mage on the report, and sludgelock is not?
Well, I mean, it’s perfectly fine if you want to be a religious zealot and just choose to believe the word of God (VS). Just don’t expect me to bend over and accept it as a gospel, since what it actually is, is a biased, hurried up report tending to what they expect people want to read.
It’s far from an objective truth, and if you played in my ranks, you’d know it.
1 Like
Not sure, but I think they require a minimum number of unique players for a deck to make the cut.