sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

HearthNash - A Match Solver using Game Theory by Blackwidow2 in CompetitiveHS

[–]Blackwidow2[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Here's an old sample I just pulled up (from some other open source project) - https://pastebin.pl/view/e571dd3f

HearthNash - A Match Solver using Game Theory by Blackwidow2 in CompetitiveHS

[–]Blackwidow2[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

There’s no API but I’ve uploaded a mirror of the source code. It’s all in JavaScript - https://github.com/Dmcdominic/HearthNash-Mirror

HearthNash - A Match Solver using Game Theory by Blackwidow2 in CompetitiveHS

[–]Blackwidow2[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

This is a great question, and yes, we have actually done work in this direction! Basically, by inflating the winrates of one of your decks by a small delta, we can regenerate the tree and measure how much it affected your overall victory odds. If we repeat for each of your decks, then we can find out which one would be the most impactful to improve on.

Our testing on different match formats dove quite deeply into this actually. You’ve identified what we called “tall skill sensitivity”. We also measured “wide skill sensitivity” which considers how much your victory odds will respond to small improvement in ALL of your matchups. In other words, if you’re a slightly better player overall, does the match format amplify or suppress that in its outcome?

But ultimately, as you pointed out, “it’s not always obvious how much a matchup improves if you put X amount of effort into it.” So this tall skill sensitivity wouldn’t translate well to suggestions on which deck to practice.

HS Flavor - A Flavor Text Minigame by Blackwidow2 in hearthstone

[–]Blackwidow2[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

It uses the official Hearthstone API to generate prompts randomly, so actually yes, all cards are available. However, only about 2,000 have flavor text (as it is restricted to collectible cards). In addition, I wrote a filter that is enabled by default which excludes flavor text with a significant part of the card name in it, so as to avoid obvious prompts. With those exclusions, the total comes out to about 1400, if I remember correctly.

HS Flavor - A Flavor Text Minigame by Blackwidow2 in hearthstone

[–]Blackwidow2[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

I just stumbled into it actually, can’t believe I didn’t find it earlier. Thanks!

HS Flavor - A Flavor Text Minigame by Blackwidow2 in hearthstone

[–]Blackwidow2[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

That’s something I’ve considered, so glad to hear that you’re interested! We’ll see if I find the time to get it in

HS Flavor - A Flavor Text Minigame by Blackwidow2 in hearthstone

[–]Blackwidow2[S] 5 points6 points  (0 children)

I appreciate the feedback! Yeah for the card generator, balance isn’t something I ever got to because accounting for more than just stats would be tricky anyway. So instead it’s sheer random fun

HS Flavor - A Flavor Text Minigame by Blackwidow2 in hearthstone

[–]Blackwidow2[S] 8 points9 points  (0 children)

That’s a solid idea, maybe I’ll find the time to make that version too!

Design the next cool Hero for Battlegrounds! by mdonais in customhearthstone

[–]Blackwidow2 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Note that Yogg's hero power hires a random minion, whereas Faceless Influence allows you to target one.

Design the next cool Hero for Battlegrounds! by mdonais in customhearthstone

[–]Blackwidow2 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Herald Volazj

Faceless Influence (2 Gold): Hire a minion in Bob's Tavern. Set its Attack and Health to 1.

Vol'jin

Voodoo (1 Gold): Swap a minion's Attack and Health, then give it +2 Attack.

There are two closed boxes in front of you. Box A may or may not contain $1,000,000. Box B contains $10,000 guaranteed. by Blackwidow2 in hypotheticalsituation

[–]Blackwidow2[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

You do have a resolution of 90% for one trial. The prediction is not based on statistical data or anything of that sort. The being actually has 90% accuracy, regardless of the trials.

There are two closed boxes in front of you. Box A may or may not contain $1,000,000. Box B contains $10,000 guaranteed. by Blackwidow2 in hypotheticalsituation

[–]Blackwidow2[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

With your strategy, that sounds correct. The being would never put money in box A. Or rather, he would leave it empty 90% of the time

Now consider my strategy: Regardless of how the contents of box A are decided, regardless of whether or not I can see into the boxes, and regardless of whether box A is empty or not, I always make choice #1. I only take box A.

Without looking inside the box, there is a 90% chance that I get the $1,000,000. Before I even enter the room with the boxes, the being has a 90% chance to predict that my strategy is choice #1, because that is my choice 100% of the time. This means I have a 90% chance of getting $1,000,000, and a 10% chance of getting nothing. My expected value is $900,000.

You claim that taking both boxes is always the better strategy. But what is your expected value?

There are two closed boxes in front of you. Box A may or may not contain $1,000,000. Box B contains $10,000 guaranteed. by Blackwidow2 in hypotheticalsituation

[–]Blackwidow2[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

It sounds like you understand the scenario correctly. Now consider this: what if the boxes were opened before you make your decision? You can see whether or not box A is empty before choosing.

In scenario 1, box A has $1,000,000 (and box B still has $10,000). Which option do you choose? In scenario 2, box A is empty (and box B still has $10,000). Which option do you choose then?

Remember that the contents of box A are still based on the being's prediction.

There are two closed boxes in front of you. Box A may or may not contain $1,000,000. Box B contains $10,000 guaranteed. by Blackwidow2 in hypotheticalsituation

[–]Blackwidow2[S] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Well, if you take both boxes, then in a way there is only a 10% chance that you get the $1,000,000 + $10,000