So, I'm looking at adding some deck statistics to my software, and I've run into a conundrum around cards with multiple base-types - Let's say Enchantment Creatures, to cite the main culprit in current T2.
The essential problem is that when I construct my query to produce percentages of the total for the deck by type, I get a total greater then 100%, on account of the fact that some of the cards appear in the running total twice - a single copy of "Aegis of the Gods", for example, counts for 2/60 rather than 1/60, on account of the fact that it's being counted as a creature and an enchantment.
I can't imagine I'm the first person to have this problem - is there a standard way that people would prefer to see this data represented? If not, would it be better to have an inaccurate total percentage (where types may be displayed with a lower percentage / draw chance than they should), or to group things by their composite types (Enchantment Creatures 30%, Artifact Creatures 10%, etc)?
Thanks all
Mike
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Minouris's Library - Collection manager and deck builder. It's nifty - Check it out!
Why is this a problem? There is no reason that things with overlapping characteristics should sum to 100%.
If you want to represent the deck graphically you could create bar graphs with shading to indicate what portion of each type is also a creature. It's hard to go much further without a composite graphic.
I should clarify that I was planning on representing it as a pie chart, where percentages are a bit more important I like the idea of the stacked bar graph, though - Thanks Vorthospike
Actually, now that I think about it, I can see the worth in presenting that data in both forms ^.^
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Minouris's Library - Collection manager and deck builder. It's nifty - Check it out!
The immediately obvious solution to things with arbitrarily complex overlapping is a normal barchart for each variable with an attached piechart showing the breakdown of the bar. I can't think of a deck in Magic that would need this but it does show all of the information. (A stacked chart could work to show Legendary and Tribal and Snow but they rapidly get difficult to read)
After some playing, I'm wondering if simpler might be better for actual analysis, with each bar showing the discreet draw chance for that type. The pie chart idea is nice, but only really useful from the point of view of giving a quick, visual overview of deck composition.
Still, It's not like I'm paying my web host by the graph - I'll implement as many as I have time to implement
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Minouris's Library - Collection manager and deck builder. It's nifty - Check it out!
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
So, I'm looking at adding some deck statistics to my software, and I've run into a conundrum around cards with multiple base-types - Let's say Enchantment Creatures, to cite the main culprit in current T2.
The essential problem is that when I construct my query to produce percentages of the total for the deck by type, I get a total greater then 100%, on account of the fact that some of the cards appear in the running total twice - a single copy of "Aegis of the Gods", for example, counts for 2/60 rather than 1/60, on account of the fact that it's being counted as a creature and an enchantment.
I can't imagine I'm the first person to have this problem - is there a standard way that people would prefer to see this data represented? If not, would it be better to have an inaccurate total percentage (where types may be displayed with a lower percentage / draw chance than they should), or to group things by their composite types (Enchantment Creatures 30%, Artifact Creatures 10%, etc)?
Thanks all
Mike
Minouris's Library - Collection manager and deck builder. It's nifty - Check it out!
If you want to represent the deck graphically you could create bar graphs with shading to indicate what portion of each type is also a creature. It's hard to go much further without a composite graphic.
Actually, now that I think about it, I can see the worth in presenting that data in both forms ^.^
Minouris's Library - Collection manager and deck builder. It's nifty - Check it out!
Still, It's not like I'm paying my web host by the graph - I'll implement as many as I have time to implement
Minouris's Library - Collection manager and deck builder. It's nifty - Check it out!