I dont know how matchmaking system works but it should probably be something like comparing winrates, levels/ experience or ranks... instead, we get faction and deck structure...
Earlier, i built an Arachas deck, i dont care if its competitive or not, and decided to play it on Casual. I was expecting to see Eithné control and NG reveal, since those are so popular these days...
Instead, in 7 matches, i get 3 boostgards, 2 Adas + Revenants, and 1 SK GS + Dagur. Those are all decks that completely counter the deck i just built, which would be ok if they were very common, but no, it just feels like they were specifiically put there to make my life miserable.
I know im not the first to complain about this, but i honestly expected this to be fixed after the beta, but it doesnt seem like it.
I think this is just an example of confirmation bias. I highly doubt they would build a system that first evaluates your deck's composition before finding you opponents.
People will build/change their decks to copy the meta, with another group of people building to counter that meta.
Once the meta shifts, the netdeckers copy, the innovators reinvent, and the cycle continues.
I do see decks pop up in popularity but it often follows from some event: Aretuza meta snapshot (this is the main one, where EVERYONE jumps on the tier 1 and 2 decks), competitive youtuber videos (cricket or someone releases a video, I see the deck), meme videos (the biggest example of this was after swim released the henselt tower insanity, which was a nice time since I was running control skellige)
Anyway, I'm not saying you're wrong, but I don't think this is the case. The meta this month has been quite fluid, and I haven't seen anything that would make me suspect conspiracy.
I think this is just an example of confirmation bias. I highly doubt they would build a system that first evaluates your deck's composition before finding you opponents.
People will build/change their decks to copy the meta, with another group of people building to counter that meta.
Once the meta shifts, the netdeckers copy, the innovators reinvent, and the cycle continues.
I do see decks pop up in popularity but it often follows from some event: Aretuza meta snapshot (this is the main one, where EVERYONE jumps on the tier 1 and 2 decks), competitive youtuber videos (cricket or someone releases a video, I see the deck), meme videos (the biggest example of this was after swim released the henselt tower insanity, which was a nice time since I was running control skellige)
Anyway, I'm not saying you're wrong, but I don't think this is the case. The meta this month has been quite fluid, and I haven't seen anything that would make me suspect conspiracy.
You're quoting something i said 7 months ago... A lot has changed, making my comment obsolete.
Also, more recently i've clarified my position on the matchmaking, and how i dont subscribe to a lot of opinions here. I'll repeat it in short form:
Matchmaking is flawed and should be improved, but i never intended to accuse CDPR of purposefully benefitting some players instead of others (i regret using the term 'rigged')
How did you come up with this number? If I think about it, the chance of going first in a single trial is 50% or 1/2. So 10 times in a row would be 1/2 x 1/2 x 1/2.... (multiply 10 times), which is 1 in 1024.
How did you come up with this number? If I think about it, the chance of going first in a single trial is 50% or 1/2. So 10 times in a row would be 1/2 x 1/2 x 1/2.... (multiply 10 times), which is 1 in 1024.
And I converted the number by dividing by zero one, or so I thought, but I actually divided by a 100. Glad someone was paying attention. I've fixed the calculation.
Today I played two matches with Henselt Draug, my first opponent was Crach Hyper Control. The second one was Eithne Control with Gimpy. Three days ago I have played AQ, my three opponents were Crach Hyper Control and two times NR Draug. I have more than 20 other evidence, that this always happens when I change my deck. So don't fucking tell me anymore, that matchmaking isn't rigged. It's a huge scandal what is going on in this game!!
The time to discuss about this is over, I have collected more than 50 cases in the last weeks. When I change my deck, I face an opponent with a deck that counters mine. The example today: I have tried a AQ swarm deck. My first opponent --> Demawend, the perfect counter to my AQ swarm (I have to say that I never met a single Demawend in the last three months in this game on pro ladder). The next opponent was Henselt, another perfect counter to my deck. It is clear now that this not happens by accident and that I'm not the only one who has this problem. So it's time that CDPR issues a statement about this and corrects this manipulative matchmaking.
[...]
Why don't you do this properly if you're so convinced. Make a specific deck, then play it 100 times. Record opponents.
Make another. Repeat.
Make a deck of random cards. Repeat.
I have been consistently playing Jan calveit since the challenge and the opponents I face have been random more or less from the current pool of popular decks.
One more thing of why your conspiracy is funny, or I just got super trolled in which case well done,
Think of it this way
Suppose A loses to B And B loses to C. And C loses to A.
You create deck A. You think the system is purposely finding deck B to beat you.
But wouldnt the system then also try to find deck C for your opponent? Unless of course you are the chosen one and there are people at cdpr working specifically just to make you lose. That seems plausible... Oh wait, no it doesn't
This thread is really funny btw...
I don't even know what the people complaining are suggesting, that the game is rigged against them in particular?
that the game is rigged against everyone? (that's impossible, because for each loser there is a winner), so there is the same number of winners than losers.
That the game is rigged against some particular archetypes? In that case you should be able to benefit yourself by playing the opposite to those archetypes...
I can say from my experience, that in this game, you have match up loses, you can have bad luck loses, but a greater percent of the results its from skill, I have played the same matchup against different people, one I recognized from top page of pro rank, and he beat me fairly, the next game I play against someone I didn't recognize, and I beat him by 15 points, and it was not just that the hands where so different, by playing the two matches in a row, I could identify how good the first opponent was, and how average the second one, and made all the difference in the end.
It isn’t a case of people winning or losing, or people being set up to be losers. It’s a case of the matchmaking system being flawed in that I can play a certain deck and confidently predict what type of deck I will play against and who will go first in the match. It happens far too often for it to be a coincidence.
It isn’t a case of people winning are losing or people being set up to be losers. It’s a case of the matchmaking system being flawed in that I can play a certain deck and confidently predict what type of deck I will play against and who will go first in the match. It happens far too often for it to be a coincidence.
Confirmation bias my dudes. I can't believe this thread is unironically 13 pages.
If I predict that I will face Svalblod, it doesn't mean the system is flawed, it means a lot of people are playing it -- it's a strong deck, so naturally there will be a lot of them in the pool of opponents.
Perhaps you'd like to put your hypothesis to the test. Record your observations (i.e. your prediction BEFOREHAND, and then what you actually end up facing). I'm interested in seeing the results.
Put the data in a csv file or excel and I'll do an analysis for you.
well, people must be really blind if they don't see that your opponents change whenever you change your deck. The reason why every patch solitaire decks like aq or svalblod so popular are because they have low interaction with the enemy board and positive win rate in long distance. Many people noticed this. I pick usurper- suddenly I'm getting matched frequently with Eithne and calveit. I pick no unit deck and what a miracle- nonstop crew of Svalbod's and genrichora's decks. There is definitely more nuances in matchmaking besides MMR. This is even more evident when you play in pro rank where the pool of your opponents is not that big.
well, people must be really blind if they don't see that your opponents change whenever you change your deck. The reason why every patch solitaire decks like aq or svalblod so popular are because they have low interaction with the enemy board and positive win rate in long distance. Many people noticed this. I pick usurper- suddenly I'm getting matched frequently with Eithne and calveit. I pick no unit deck and what a miracle- nonstop crew of Svalbod's and genrichora's decks. There is definitely more nuances in matchmaking besides MMR. This is even more evident when you play in pro rank where the pool of your opponents is not that big.
So by your claims, then Eithne and Calveit are being matched up vs Usurper? Just pick Eithne or Calveit and farm usurpers for easy wins.
Or pick Svalblad/Gerni, and farm the no unit decks.
Free MMR!
Either that, or the system is specifically picking decks to just counter you, right?
Also, "a lot of people noticing" something is an appeal to popularity (argumentum ad populum) -- it is a fallacy. Again, coupled with confirmation bias, you'll have a bunch of people all making the same claim, then thinking that it's justified.
I'd honestly love to see some actual data on this, because these claims are really not a good reason to start claiming that there's some MMR conspiracy going on.
Like I feel like I'm being trolled...
" your opponents change whenever you change your deck"
You're right. Your opponents deck change in between matches. Your opponents deck will change when you also DON'T change your deck too.
Moderator: Purely in the interests of civility, I'd like to reminder everyone here to keep this thread friendly, please. Regardless of the topic, ridicule and name-calling are not welcome. With this is mind, carry on with the discussion.
Confirmation bias my dudes. I can't believe this thread is unironically 13 pages.
If I predict that I will face Svalblod, it doesn't mean the system is flawed, it means a lot of people are playing it -- it's a strong deck, so naturally there will be a lot of them in the pool of opponents.
Perhaps you'd like to put your hypothesis to the test. Record your observations (i.e. your prediction BEFOREHAND, and then what you actually end up facing). I'm interested in seeing the results.
Put the data in a csv file or excel and I'll do an analysis for you.
So today I’ve been playing with NG deck that would probably do well against most other factions. I’ve been playing ranked and have suspected that in my first few games I’ll play against NG and i might go first a couple of times.
I’ve played 6 games, all against NG and I’ve gone first each time. How is that not a flawed system? Are you seriously telling me NG is so popular people don’t play anything else. Because I can guarantee if I changed factions I’ll play against a different one.
Are you seriously telling me NG is so popular people don’t play anything else. Because I can guarantee if I changed factions I’ll play against a different one.
IIRC today is the last day that gives +50% XP with Calveit. So yes, it is perfectly normal that you see a lot of NG. It is like this since the underdog challenge ended. I for one, played Calveit exclusively in the last week although I usually don’t play NG.
IIRC today is the last day that gives +50% XP with Calveit. So yes, it is perfectly normal that you see a lot of NG. It is like this since the underdog challenge ended. I for one, played Calveit exclusively in the last week although I usually don’t play NG.
IIRC today is the last day that gives +50% XP with Calveit. So yes, it is perfectly normal that you see a lot of NG. It is like this since the underdog challenge ended. I for one, played Calveit exclusively in the last week although I usually don’t play NG.
Getting sick to the bones of this deck matchmaking.
The people who are calling this a conspiracy theory must be playing a different game. Every single time I switch decks, I only get X type of opponents. I switch decks back and then I get Y type of opponents. It's like clockwork, it doesn't happen most of the time, it happens all the time, every single time.
I'm gonna start recording this and posting it here. It is insanely frustrating and broken.
Post automatically merged:
I ran a full experiment on this today, and let me start by saying: just because you haven't experienced something or noticed it, does not mean it doesn't exist, and it sure doesn't make the messenger a conspiracy lunatic.
I ran two Monsters decks, because I wanted some MO MMR. So all of this is in Ranked btw Rank 23 and 22.
DECK #1: Detlaff, Kayran - Katakan - Detlaff: Higher Vampire, Oriana & Queen of the Night, lots of bleeding; and Caranthir and some more stuff. I made this one myself, it's a pretty tempo-strong deck with some really cool power swings.
Matchmaking: I get matched with absolutely ridiculous point-vomit decks - various Syndicate setups, insane value Henselt & Foltest, you name it. And that is ALL I get, not one deck which is not point spam (!!) AND Tier 1 metadeck.
Result: With all my nifty combos, I have nowhere near enough control to face these things, I get out-tempoed and lose every single time.
DECK #2: I now switch to a meta deck I found on the internet. It's basically Detlaff Shupe with a bunch of control. I hate it. It's clunky, the point output is abysmal, I am expecting to get steamrolled by those meta decks I was facing earlier.
Matchmaking: Lo and behold, I now only get paired with no-name decks which have almost no common thread. It's obvious that these players are new and/or do not have enough resources to craft coherent decks. Not a sign of those Tier 1 decks, no point vomit at all, only weird decks with zero to little interaction between units.
Result: I win every single time except 2 matches, one because I misplayed, one because I was facing a half-decent deck.
In order to eliminate the possibility that different players are coming in now because of the timezone or whatever, I go back to DECK #1 and play two matches - because I'm pretty bored by this point. The matchmaking changes immediately and I first face Francesca Dorfs and then Dijkstra Townsfolk.
You're going to say "well yeah, maybe your deck sucks and the meta deck you found on the net was actually good, that's what explains your wins and losses". Sure, maybe my deckbuilding sucks. But that's beside the point.
The point is - and I swear to God this is true - when I was playing my deck I only got the top ranking metadecks of the day, and only of the kinds with insane point output. When I was playing the Detlaff Shupe, I only got new players with broken decks.
And I'm not talking a trend, I'm not talking most of my matches, I'm talking ALL of them. There was not one SINGLE exception to this rule, and I've been playing all day. Play one deck - get A type of opponents. Play another deck - get B type of opponents.
And if you still refuse to believe me, I'm taking pics/video/whatever of it next time.
