Convinced this is just another rigged TCG
I haven't won a coin flip in the last 10+ games and I am seeing the same one of cards in my opening hand every single game and dead drawing every turn.
This was after having had played really good games since I started playing, having some weird occurrences against opponents seemingly just conceding or playing like a bot.
Nothing has changed in my deck. The only change is losing every coin flip. 10 matches in a row had to mulligan 3 times to get a basic pokemon. Dead drawing. Watching my opponent just always have exactly what they need. Also, getting Iono'd turn 2 if for some reason I have all my evolutions and rare candies and bosses orders in hand just to shuffle it and get back all my one of cards and energy retrieval cards with nothing in my discard pile. Then dead drawing over and over.
I think I have been playing 2-3 weeks now so I guess they decided I was winning too much and not purchasing enough stuff.
Anyway, it was fun while it lasted.
Pokémon: 9
2 Blastoise ex MEW 9
1 Bibarel SWSHALT 85
2 Pidgeot ex OBF 164
2 Origin Forme Palkia V ASR 39
2 Origin Forme Palkia VSTAR ASR 40
1 Radiant Greninja ASR 46
1 Bidoof CRZ 111
3 Squirtle PGO 15
2 Pidgey MEW 16
Trainer: 14
4 Ultra Ball SVI 196
4 Irida ASR 147
1 Switch SVI 194
4 Rare Candy SVI 191
1 Canceling Cologne ASR 136
3 Earthen Vessel PAR 163
3 Buddy-Buddy Poffin TEF 144
2 Energy Retrieval SVI 171
2 Superior Energy Retrieval PAL 189
1 Cyllene ASR 138
1 Maximum Belt TEF 154
1 Pal Pad SVI 182
4 Nest Ball SVI 181
2 Boss's Orders PAL 172
Energy: 1
11 Basic {W} Energy Energy 47
Total Cards: 60
Comments
-
This topic comes up a lot. Perhaps that is a sign that there is a problem with RNG in the game.
Conversely, humans are very bad at recognising true randomness, and will identify and remember apparent order and patterns where they don't actually exist.
Tossing a coin 1000 times in a truly random system could result in heads 1000 times. It's just as probable as 500/500, or any other result. A rigged system might result in something like 521/479 heads to tails, yet I bet most people would say the latter "looks" more random.
But you will need more compelling evidence than "I didn't win my coin tosses and I drew bad hands" to prove bias in the system.
1 -
To avoid getting mulligans, you might want to add more Basic Pokémon to your deck.
1 -
Tbh you can have the same argument in virtualy every game. This game is particularly badly programed overall, why would the pseudorandom algorithm they chose/made be any better...
So yes it seems rigged (in a way they all are) but I bet they can't make it any better.
0 -
You can buy packs and packs give you codes. You don't think they are monitoring your code input rate and considering your match-ups based that (plus other factors.)
I've actually noticed this is the case in many games that have a business strategy that is to sell a set of items. I think the first time I really noticed it was in a game called Call of Duty when they released the Honeybadger. If you didn't have it it would put you in games with someone who does have it. After my friend decided to get it, we were getting games where we were the only one with it and it was such an easy time in the game.
There are quite a few games I've noticed this in too and in some casual texas hold'em games I had noticed I could create a new account and instantly win practically every hand just by going all in every time. I'm not the only one who experienced this.
It's like going to the casino for the first time. You are very likely to win and take home money on your first time if you stop after you win. Once your account reaches a certain threshold they make you lose.
Skill based games are harder to rig, like Call of Duty, but I had gotten so good at that game that they had to stack my team with the worst players just to balance the match. I won a match were everyone on my team went negative. The second highest player on my team had a KDR of 0.67. So I had to carry that whole team.
It reminds me of Diablo Immortal where people were paying to become overpowered and crushing players who had spent less. Of course, they over spent and got to a point where they were in a league of their own but I have noticed since PUBG mobile that sanctioned botting is becoming a popular method to deal with low player counts or to basically give new players a trail period in which they can enjoy the game.
Pokemon is no stranger to botting. Pokemon Unite used bots and would disguise their bots as real players by using real user names and it seemed if you had one too many games then they would make your entire team bots and the other team would consist of actual humans.
I'm no stranger to matchmaking manipulation techniques either. Considering that MMR is the easiest and clearest numeric to know what kind of opponents you will face off against particularly in a skill based game. Rocket League and Starcraft are two examples where you can manipulate your MMR to get favorable match ups and the term is called "Smurfing".
It's hilarious to me that people think that a company that makes money from selling RNG won't manipulate that RNG to make more money but they know that people will manipulate matchmaking and even spending money to win.
Anyway, it was a fun game while it lasted. I have a paper deck and a friend to play against and it's always a good time.
2 -
It makes no sense that they would rig the game against players who aren't spending money. This goes for any game.
It's well established that players are MORE likely to spend money if they are having FUN. Losing isn't fun. People are more likely to quit playing a game if they lose too much than to spend money on the game. And on the flip side, people are more will to spend money on a game they are enjoying.
Additionally. It's already a pain in the assets to create a match making system in the first place. Imagine having to also filter and sort the matches based on your spending habits… nah. I just don't buy the idea. doesnt seem efficient. I'm already compelled to buy the cards because I enjoy collecting them, the code is just a bonus.
0
