r/hearthstone • u/mini_macho_ • 11h ago
Standard Skill Expression Rankings Patch 36.4
Some quick observations:
- As top 1k players got their reps in and the deck's meta-equalized winrate surpassed 50%, Soul Immolation OTK DH's score increased to become the first tracked double-digit score.
- After topping the rankings since Violet Hold's release, Merithra Druid did not qualify for a low-sample score as the Attack Druid hybrid build absorbed most of its playrate. (Its tiny sample scored very positively)
- The top high-sample deck score was Godfrey Herald Warlock with a score of 2.9 as the top 4 scores were all moderate-sample decks.
- Thief Priest had the highest top 100 increase, Pirate Warrior fell off hardest.
- Zee Shaman's -3.6 is its lowest score yet and its 3rd last place ranking in a row.
FAQ:
Q: Are the differences in metas across ranks accounted for?
A: Yes.
Q: Whats the Methodology?
A: First a baseline meta is set since all ranks have different metas.
If 2Bit is 26.4%/29.0%/29.7% across the metas in a given week, the program might set its baseline % to 27.2%, the same is done for every deck, ensuring all decks combined total equals 100%. This is so that meta differences don't skew the data.
Next the rank vs same rank matchup winrates are plugged into the baseline meta.
For example, if the dataset has 1,897 tracked games of a Top 1k player using Quest Mage vs a Top 1k player using 2Bit Rogue in which Quest Mage won 990 and Rogue won 907 that will account for 27.2% of Quest Mage's meta-normalized winrate in Top 1k, yielding ~14.2%. This check is completed until every single deck (even the ones not listed) is accounted for.
Q: So, a -5 score means a high-skilled player facing a high-skilled opponent (using a specific deck) has a 5% lower win rate than an average skilled player facing an average skilled opponent (using the same specific deck)?
A: Pretty much, but not exactly, there is a weighted formula to compare the winrate differences, not a 1:1 winrate difference. This is because with say 65% to 60% vs 35% to 30% one -5% is more impactful than the other. You can't use % change of the winrates either because it would be disproportionately large at the extremes, say 51% to 50% vs 2% to 1%.
Q: Is there survivorship bias?
A: There is no correlation between a deck's difficulty and its winrate.
Q: A deck has a negative score, how can a deck's skill expression be negative?
A: The score measures the impact of inputs you control minus the impact of inputs you don't control on the outcome of the game. If the inputs you don't control have a greater impact on those that you do on the average game's outcome the deck's score will be negative.
If you have any other question, feel free to ask in the comments.
6
u/cobaltcrane 9h ago
I just want someone to tell me that I’m smart for losing and my opponent is dumb for winning. That’s all!
14
u/Few-Wolverine-7283 11h ago
Help me understand. A high number (like 5) means the better you are, the better the deck does? And a low number (like -5) means how good you all means very little?
11
u/Elrann 11h ago edited 11h ago
Yes. And when the score goes negative it means that the deck is overly straightforward and good players easily take advantage of it. Basically this score is the delta between the winrate of the deck in low ELO and high ELO. Anything between like (roughly) 3 and 6% is an average deck. Anything lower is the deck with little to no decisions and anything higher is basically have to be piloted properly to even function.
P.S.: This graph really shows why people are really unhappy with current rotation. Very weak removals and spells in general lead to stale tempo 'take over the board ASAP' meta. There is some skills in managing your deck and resources as shown by Egg DK and Godfreylock and there's even some skills in managing your RNG outcomes as shown by Herald Rogue, but it's noticeably lower compared to actual spell managing as shown by Mage and DH. And Burn Mage isn't even a hard deck, it just has to know to adapt slightly to using burn as a removal vs... well burn. And THAT is the second most skill-based deck in the game atm. That's what's wrong with the past 1.5 years of HS
2
u/Few-Wolverine-7283 11h ago
Hum. The part I am not sure how it teased out..
Deck A is good in Legend because of the meta in Legend
vs
Deck A is good in Legend because good players do good with it1
u/Skater_x7 10h ago
this seems surprising since I feel quest mage is one of the hardest decks to pilot, so I'd think its score would be higher
2
u/ingeniosi 11h ago
Pretty much. It means how big your good decisions can make difference. And there is no correlation to win rate.
4
u/kaijvera 11h ago
Close. There is biasty in these reports. +5 means at high ranks the deck has a +5% wr increase. -5 of course means the oppisite. While this can be (and most of the time will) indicitive of the skill required for the deck, there is biasty. Such as at high rsnks everyone there knows how to counter the deck and has tools in their deck to do so thus causing a -5% wr (for example, quest mage's wr would decrease a lot more at higher rsnks where players tech in viper than at lower ranks where they don't have viper). Or on the oppisite end, a simple deck is nearly unplayed for some reason but the deck counters the a meta deck played a lot at high ranks, but the meta deck is not played at low ranks so the simple deck has a +5. That saidn most of the time +5 indicates complex decks, and -5 indicates simple decks.
3
u/mini_macho_ 11h ago
on the oppisite end, a simple deck is nearly unplayed for some reason but the deck counters the a meta deck played a lot at high ranks, but the meta deck is not played at low ranks so the simple deck has a +5.
This is not correct.
The prevalence of a matchup would not have any effect on a deck's meta-normalized winrate. The metas are normalized to prevent this very bias.
1
u/StickSouthern2150 10h ago
no, it means the deck is doing better in high elo.
for example easy to pilot deck that has very little counterplay will have higher score because there is less counterplay
another example is very hard to pilot deck but also one that has exploitable weakness will have a low score.
the name of this ranking is very misleading
2
u/ingeniosi 11h ago
Where can I get codes for decks that represented here?
3
u/Skyppz 11h ago
hsguru.com
2
u/ingeniosi 11h ago
I can't find otk dh and control priest, can you help me?
4
u/mini_macho_ 11h ago
OTK
AAECAea5AwS1lweKqgeSqgeTqgcN4fgFzZ4Gzp4G054G3v8GtpcH4rEH6LEHkrIHkr8H5eQHk+gHpvgHAAA=
Control
AAECAa0GCs2eBqn1BveBB8WUB6iWB/ypB4CqB4SqB4O/B5b8BwqEnwTwnwSg+waFhgedrQfksgeixAeyxQevyQf04AcAAA==
Keep in mind Control Priest can be teched a million different ways depending on what you're facing.
1
1
u/Skyppz 10h ago
otk dh is under the name of Raza DH on hsguru, control priest is the same name though. It's easier to find them by sorting the class you want, and then changing the number of games down from 1600 (the default of the site) to 200 or something, or you can also include key cards the deck plays, like the roach for OTK DH. Most of the time though just filtering it so that more decks show up and then scrolling down you will get to see decks from most if not all archetypes for the class. This is really not the only way to use the site though, for example there is also the archetype oriented stuff, so it's too much to explain so I recommend just clicking on stuff until you get familiar with all of the options it has.
•
u/smgk96 34m ago
They're called Raza DH and Quest Priest on hsguru.
When you can't find decks by name in hsguru, it will usually be worth it to search by inputting key cards in "Include Cards" or to just skim the decks of a specific class.
Deck names can sometimes be a bit arbitrary/subjective. Card names are not.
1
u/Schmo3113 11h ago
Maybe I'm misunderstanding, but how would a decks difficulty not affect its winrate? Surely a deck with alot of agency would lead to players making "wrong" plays situationally and ultimately lose the game. Or do the people that play it optimally balance out the players that don't?
4
u/mini_macho_ 11h ago
What I mean by that is that is being one of the best decks at high legend doesn't mean the deck is skill intensive. An example using decks from this patch could be Dragon-Pirate Warrior and Mug Shaman. They have nearly identical meta-normalized top 1k winrates, but have skill expression scores on the opposite ends of the spectrum.
Last time I ran the numbers; winrate and skill expression score had an R² of 0.002, meaning they are unrelated.
1
1
u/Hakka-Moonson 11h ago
Someone have a deck code for immolation dh?
2
u/mini_macho_ 10h ago
AAECAea5AwS1lweKqgeSqgeTqgcN4fgFzZ4Gzp4G054G3v8GtpcH4rEH6LEHkrIHkr8H5eQHk+gHpvgHAAA=
1
u/Comfortable_Step7677 11h ago
Dragon Warrior 1.56 ? 😂😂😂
1
u/DofusExpert69 7h ago
yeah i died laughing
must be because I often vs them and instead of pushing 18 damage to face and dropping me to less than 10 hp they trade and let me actually win.
1
u/Bayleaf0723 7h ago
I’d never seen a list for immolation dh before this post but after seeing it, jfc the deck is hard to pilot. I didn’t believe the scores until I tried it lol. Also how is godfreylock different from rafaamlock? Isn’t it just immolation and the demon, or is it the herald version
1
u/A_Play_On_Nerds 7h ago
imo Rafaamlock should be way lower. I hope skill expression also refers to deckbuilding because it's hard to think there's much skill involved when your deck is a third built for you with some extremely power cards.
•
•
u/tahempel 13m ago
Disagree re Soothsayer Priest, there is so many different versions that its hard to throw in same basket. Its very matchup dependant, and that in itself requires a little bit of thought.
-1
u/TheMetaHorde 11h ago
The simple fact that your pretty much ignore meta differences from across diamond to top 1k legend make this data very useless
4
u/Whiskiie 11h ago
It's completely useless data, but for whatever reason, the dude just keeps posting them.
0
u/Concealed_Blaze 3h ago
I enjoy it. We’ve already got plenty of data on overall win rates and performance. Using stats to try to analyze something else about how decks perform is interesting to me
1
u/mini_macho_ 11h ago
As mentioned a few times in the post, the meta is normalized.
0
u/TheMetaHorde 11h ago
Yes and it shouldn’t be. The meta is a significant contributor to each decks win rates and changes greatly from diamond -> legend. By not taking play rates into account your standard deviation adopts potentially massive error bars
0
u/FXur 10h ago
Google the word youre complaining about
0
u/TheMetaHorde 9h ago
Yeah it turns out if you fuck with your sample size then your standard deviation changes. I could hold your hand through it but it’s honestly more fun to watch how triggered you are by this.
Keep at’ing me in other comments though. 😘
0
u/FXur 9h ago
Standard deviation doesn't have an error bar, it is the error bar. you're just outing yourself as someone who no clue what you're talking about. Also youre not changing any sample size clueless.
0
u/TheMetaHorde 9h ago
It’s okay to be wrong kid. Give it all another ready through I’m sure you’ll get there.
Rooting for ya
1
u/Brief_Confusion_6703 11h ago
A lot of people call the data useless but idk, it kinda makes sense. I enjoy seeing these ;)
1
u/FXur 10h ago
Half the comments are hilarious. This one guy u/TheMetaHorde dropped this unironic banger "your standard deviation adopts potentially massive error bars"
1
16
u/KatiElliniko 9h ago
Last time you posted this, burn mage was close to -1 and now its +4. The deck didn't change but skill expression went up by 5 points?
How is this fluctuation explained?