Why am I losing?

[Guest Guest]

You're missing a very fundamental reason: cards. This game is made to make money, and your basic cards selection is chosen so people who HAVE paid money get an easy win against you.

[Damien 1,514]

You're missing a very fundamental reason: cards. This game is made to make money, and your basic cards selection is chosen so people who HAVE paid money get an easy win against you.

I think you are completely mistaken. Some people have reached Legend with basic decks.

[Guest Dave]

Vlad, I appreciate you writing this article to help new players like me.  I also appreciate the way you have responded with respect to people who disagree with you.  I'm so tired of people on the internet being rude to other people, just because they can hide behind a username.  Thanks!

 

Dave

[Guest d3vkit]

It's kind of funny how many people seem to be missing the point of the section about luck. It doesn't matter how much of the game is actually based around luck, you can't control that; if you want to enjoy playing the game you should probably focus on what can be controlled. Seemed pretty clear to me.

[Guest Aaeiyn]

IDK.  I still don't have all my basic cards, and as a level 3 Rogue getting screwed over by people with cards other then basic.

[Oltier 471]

IDK.  I still don't have all my basic cards, and as a level 3 Rogue getting screwed over by people with cards other then basic.

Just as in every TCG.. :)

[KungFuJello 0]

OK, now how about the truth. Noobs loose in constructed deck play because the engine matches them up with decks loaded with rares on up. I assume this is intentional to get new players to spend money upgrading their decks.

[Sottle 221]

I think your tinfoil hat needs adjusting there sir :P

[Guest Palanor]

I've been playing for about 4 weeks and just this weekend started to have a good deal of success. At first I thought there was a lot of luck to the game, then I realized that I wasn't playing efficiently. I started to watch twitch channels, paying attention to how the host played their games. I recommend everyone do this, as I learned quite a bit from doing so.

 

One important thing I learned was to mulligan anything you wouldn't play on turns 1-4. Early on I was keeping cards that were 1-4 mana cost, but some of those cards, hex or consecration are better saved for later in the game. Now I just try to get minions or damage dealing spells that I can use to keep my opponent off balance until I get a feel for the deck they are playing and the style of their play.
 

[Guest Guest]

i liked the part where it says that you dont lose because of bad luck but because of your own poor plays. so true since GvG was released kappa

[Oltier 471]

i liked the part where it says that you dont lose because of bad luck but because of your own poor plays. so true since GvG was released kappa

If you always have to rely on luck to win, then you are playing poorly.

[Guest Hudson]

While well-written, the article is sadly based on the logical fallacy that "other perspective than mine = misconception".

Fact of the matter is that this game is heavily based on RNG. That's why a big part of being a skilled player comes down to mitigating the effects of the randomness in question by making the most optimal plays with every possible scenario in mind. But foresight and premeditation can only do so much in a game where you don't know every card your opponent has, what cards you're gonna draw next, which minion will be taken by Windrunners Deathrattle and so on. Even the best players in the world get bodied some times despite playing almost flawlessly, due to the nature of the game.

 

Don't get me wrong here, I'm not complaining on the games' mechanics or hating on it; I'm just saying that this is the way the game is, and by playing, you accept this fact. It's one of the reasons that this game is so fun, but also frustrating some times. And of course it's possible to become better at the game, which like I said, has plenty to do with handling RNG as good as possible. That in itself is indeed a skill, but that does not change the fact that Hearthstone is random by nature.

A better way to approach this (IMHO) would have been "Yes, this game naturally has a lot of RNG in it. I am going to help you deal with that and play around it so that you can become a better player".
 

That being said, the article has a lot of good points and thoughts in it.

[Sottle 221]

based on the logical fallacy that "other perspective than mine = misconception".

Fact of the matter

Uh...huh. 

 

[Sottle 221]

Anyway, again people seem to be misunderstanding a fairly clearly worded section of the article. It's not a denial that luck factors into the game, it's simply advocating evaluating games beyond the point where the RNG went against you, and figuring out whether you could have done anything to have been in a better position where perhaps that outcome wouldn't have mattered.

[Guest Guest_Hudson]

Uh...huh. 

 

 

 

I think it's fairly obvious that what I'm saying is that it's a fact that the game has a lot of RNG in it. That is not subject to interpretation. It is what it is, and Blizzard has deliberately made the game this way. It's part of what makes the game both fun and addicting.

How you actually choose to approach this aspect of the game, however, is completely up to the players.

 

But then again, you could just be trolling, so hat's off to you in that case.

[Sottle 221]

No, I just found it amusing that you stated that a clearly written article was being dismissive of other points of view, and then immediately after used blanket terms like "Fact of the matter".

 

Also your statement was not "has a lot of RNG in it" it was "based on RNG" those are different concepts.

 

I'm not even sure what your criticism is, since your point of "There is RNG in the game, and is up to the skill of the player to manage and mitigate it" is exactly the point of the section of the article in question. It seems strange to me that you're seemingly disagreeing with it.

[Guest Guest_Hudson]

No, I just found it amusing that you stated that a clearly written article was being dismissive of other points of view, and then immediately after used blanket terms like "Fact of the matter".

 

Also your statement was not "has a lot of RNG in it" it was "based on RNG" those are different concepts.

 

I'm not even sure what your criticism is, since your point of "There is RNG in the game, and is up to the skill of the player to manage and mitigate it" is exactly the point of the section of the article in question. It seems strange to me that you're seemingly disagreeing with it.

 

You find it amusing because you failed to understand my point. I'm afraid I can't make it much clearer.

Why you're more concerned with arguing about semantics rather than the subject at hand is beyond me, but that is a discussion I'm not really interested in. Like I said in my original post; I think the approach of "you weren't unlucky, you just played bad" is a weird one to make (I'd say that more often than not, it's a mixture of both). While not inherently wrong, one can't claim it to be an absolute truth either. How you handle and play around luck is indeed a skill, but luck is the key word here. It's almost an oxymoron.

 

And as you've acknowledged yourself, other people have also commented on this. It's a good article, but to me it seems very apologetic about the games' nature for some reason. Embrace the randomness of Hearthstone instead. My original post still stands, but it's only my opinion.

[Oltier 471]

but to me it seems very apologetic about the games' nature for some reason

Well you know, no one is forcing you to play this game if you don't enjoy its random factor. No game is worth playing if you just get annoyed by it. On the other hand, when this RNG is on my side, I feel super happy and excited. This is indeed a part of the game's nature, but if this is not for you, then there are several other TCGs on the market that include much fewer luck.. Although, for me those games are incredibly boring.

[Sottle 221]

You find it amusing because you failed to understand my point. I'm afraid I can't make it much clearer.

Why you're more concerned with arguing about semantics rather than the subject at hand is beyond me, but that is a discussion I'm not really interested in. Like I said in my original post; I think the approach of "you weren't unlucky, you just played bad" is a weird one to make (I'd say that more often than not, it's a mixture of both). While not inherently wrong, one can't claim it to be an absolute truth either. How you handle and play around luck is indeed a skill, but luck is the key word here. It's almost an oxymoron.

 

And as you've acknowledged yourself, other people have also commented on this. It's a good article, but to me it seems very apologetic about the games' nature for some reason. Embrace the randomness of Hearthstone instead. My original post still stands, but it's only my opinion.

 

Seems there are points being missed on both sides here.

The article isn't being apologetic about RNG, it's advocating a healthy learning attitude. Holding the mentality of "well, I just lost to a coinflip" isn't going to help you improve. You need to analyse the game deeper than that and try and figure out if you could have put yourself in a better position with stronger plays so that the RNG wouldn't have mattered. While there are games that were just unwinnable because of draws or random effects, even if you played perfectly, assuming that is the case is not going to help you improve at the game. 

[Aliervo 0]

This is a very good article, especially for its target audience (beginners).  The one point that I have seen in these comments that I would tend to agree with is that there should be some mention of cards.  In constructed, I don't care how good you are, there will eventually come a game when you lose because you just don't have the cards to compete.  Don't get me wrong, decks made with only basic cards can be very good, I have used a few myself and it is incredibly satisfying to win with cards that absolutely anyone can use.  On the other hand, there are certainly times when having better cards will win you games.  For instance, I wanted to try out several of my new mech cards, so I made a priest deck, typed mech into the search box, clicked everything, and then topped it off with several legendaries and two spells.  This deck should have been just ok because there was not a ton of synergy in it, and yet I won a lot more often than I expected... likely because there is not much that even a great player can do when I drop a legendary every other turn.  Since this guide is meant to help out new players, perhaps a small section should be added about having "good" cards.  Doesn't have to be much, maybe just a little something to keep new players from getting discouraged when they get stomped by a couple epics or legendaries, maybe even go as far as to say that if the only way you are getting crushed is by decks with legendary cards, then you should take heart in the fact that you have gotten to the same MMR as the decks that include those legendaries (meaning you are likely a better player than they are).

 

Now on to the topic of RNG...  I agree that this article does seem to downplay the amount of RNG a little bit, but this is not necessarily a bad thing.  If you adopt the attitude of this piece, you will surely grow as a player a lot faster than if you blame every loss on luck.  My first deck that I ever really liked was a mage deck I constructed, and at first there did seem to be a lot of luck involved as to whether or not I would be able to beat someone.  Then I found my problem, my deck had absolutely no card draw... I threw in a couple of Gadgetzan Auctioneers and it became much less about luck and much more about whether or not I could effectively use my cards to out-play my opponents.

 

But it would appear that my opponents did not like my superior deck-making skills, they must have prayed hard to the RNG gods to smite me down... and it appears to have worked.  I would say in the last week for over half of my matches I have received back a card I mulliganed, and I have lost count of the number of times I have lost the match to the perfect topdeck.  I have gone several arena runs without the option to select any board clears or legendaries, and the times I do receive legendaries they are "shuffled" to the very bottom of my deck.  So in a quest to regain the RNG gods' favor, I have crafted a deck that maximizes randomousity and secrecy.  Do I lose more games than I win? Maybe, I haven't been counting.  Is this deck purely in the hands of the RNG gods? Not quite; while they may determine several cards in my deck, the way those cards are played is still in my hands (pun-intended).  Is this perhaps the most fun deck I have ever created? Probably.

 

(In case you couldn't decipher that last paragraph: I was having what appeared to be terrible luck, so I naturally made a luck based deck. It is a mage deck full of secrets and "random" cards like the unstable portal.  It is a lot of fun to play, but I cannot guarantee success.)

 

P.S. If anyone is interested in "trying their luck" with my deck, let me know, I will be more than happy to share it.

[Guest Tom Ace]

I think this article downplays the role of luck in Hearthstone too much.  Almost every strategy game involves luck; it's only a matter of how important it is in the particular game.  In Hearthstone it's very important.  

 

A quick illustration:

 

Chess is a strategy game that involves little to no luck at all.  A great player will beat a mediocre player every time, or at least 99% of the time.

 

Heroclix, which I used to play, involves some luck, but not a huge amount.  A great player will beat a mediocre player the vast majority of the time, probably 90% of the time.  That's because the only real luck involved is dice.

 

Hearthstone involves considerably more luck.  A great player will beat a mediocre one most of the time, but probably more like 70-75% of the time.  

 

So, in any games like these the most important thing is to be skilled and knowledgeable.  If you are those things, you'll win more than you lose.  But Hearthstone does involve a significant amount of luck, more than some people like.  

 

With that said, if you want to keep playing and your goal is to climb the ranks, you have to accept the luck factor and work around it.  

 

[Guest star15man]

I disagree - luck is a considerable factor in the Arena portion of hearthstone, in 3 ways. 

 

1: What your deck options are when building (primary reason)

2: How your cards come up when playing (secondary reason)

3: Who you get randomly matched to play with (secondary reason)

 

For #1: Sometimes you'll have a perfect build come up. Other times, you'll get a lot of crappy cards. Often enough, you'll be forced to decide between two cards both of which you'd really love, only to find that later on you have another chance (or 2 or 3) at the card you chose, but never again see the card you didn't take. 

 

For #2: That's really self explanatory - You can select an even spread of cards across all mana values, and get screwed over by only the high mana cost cards coming up. Similarly, with the exact same mana spread, you can get all the low value cards and have unused mana all the time because you've played all your cards.

 

For #3: Yes, at 7 wins, 0 losses you'll usually find harder opponents than at 0 wins, 2 losses, because you get matched with people at the same win/loss streak. But with all the luck involved in the game already, that's not always the case. 

 

There are multiple times I've won 8 games in a row. There are also multiple times I've lost 8 games in a row. And these have happened with the same classes, so it isn't as if I'm bad with some classes but good with others. 

 

Skill is also a factor, but that won't prevent a good player from sometimes losing every single match with an arena deck, and it won't prevent a bad player from winning more matches than he/she loses with an arena deck.

[Sottle 221]

People still seem to continually misunderstand this articles stance on luck. It is not saying that luck does not play a factor in the game, it's saying that blaming luck is not a healthy attitude, instead it's better to ignore the "bad luck" and instead try and work out if there's anything you could have done to put yourself in a better position to win the game, lucky or not.

[Sottle 221]

To the specific Arena concerns above, many excellent Arena players, myself included, operate at above a 7.5 average. That means that we're taking even the decks that you're describing, where we don't get offered powerful cards, or a decent Mana curve to a respectable amount of wins.

But yes, even the best players sometimes go 1-3

[Guest Guest]

Ive experienced 15 winstreak, then losing the next 10. With the same plays, same metas and everything. This game is so luck based! You have no idea. Played since early beta, and any jerk could win any matchup. If i was signed by a pro team, I could win a tournement, just based on luck. Shit frustrating game that is 25% copying PROS decks, and 75% drawing the right cards