Holy ***** this permeates every single game mode and makes Arena (along with other issues) an unplayable mess. For those not tuned in, this is an issue that has been brought up by several others, wherein the great "random" shuffler will often deal you out the same cards (usually low cost ones) so frequently as to approach infinitesimal odds of probability. For example if I have 4 Shocks in my deck, I will often be dealt those 4 shocks one after the other early in the game. I've been keeping track of this with my decks. It happens ALL the time. Not just 1 out of 20 matches or something. I played three games in a row and saw either three or all four of my Cast Downs in the first 5 turns. I just finished a Draft game and my opponent had four Frenzied Rages cast within the first four tuns. Just finished another game where my opponent had four Essence Scatters in turns 2-5. This game is just so busted, I cant fathom how Wizards could let this happen. Either its intentional but they dont want to admit it, or its the result of terrible development and they dont want to acknowledge it. Either way there has been no word from them on the issue, and the official forum white knights claim it's all imaginary. Test it yourselves. I had been saving screenshots of graveyards that were just repeats of the same four cards in a row, but it got pointless after a while.
I mean, obviously I know what you WANT to see, that this is a community-wide issue and uncovering the mass conspiracy of Wizards deliberately rigging games so streamers always win at the expense of all the scrubs. That you can justify poor play and poorer results by blaming the faulty randomization algorithm.
The problem is, that isn't the case. Most of us aren't having this issue, and most of us are quite fine with the randomization because we don't get bent out of shape when things happen on occasion. You have to remember, hundreds of thousands of games are played on Arena every day, even more so with the hype that TGA gave them. With so many people playing so many matches, it's a given that things that are statistical improbabilities happen, whether it's a 1-in-20 chance, a 1-in-2500 chance, or even a 1-in-50,000 chance. You're only seeing the one result that was unlikely, not taking into account the other 49,999 times where it didn't. What makes this argument keep popping up is that there's no way for the rational among us to disprove it: properly randomized decks won't have anything notable to make it obviously properly randomized, so you can constantly claim that it's rigged for lack of a counterexample.
The shuffler isn't against you, the game isn't against you, the company isn't against you. It's all in your head.
EDIT: Let's just assume, for the sake of implausibility, that you get 4 copies of a card in your opening hand of 7. Hypergeometric distribution shows us the probability of this happening is shown in the attachment. If you don't want to open it, it's 0.0071775% - or 7.17 instances out of every 100,000. Let's assume that a quarter million games are played each day - a number that honestly I think is really low, but it proves the point - that 18 games EVERY DAY are going to have someone draw all 4 copies of a card in their opener. You having one of the 18 is nothing notable.
Top 16 - 2012 Indiana State Championships Currently Playing: GBStandard - Golgari Safari MidrangeBG RBWModern - Mardu PyromancerWBR RLegacy - Good Old Fashioned BurnR
[quote from="Algernone25 »" If you don't want to open it, it's 0.0071775% - or 7.17 instances out of every 100,000. Let's assume that a quarter million games are played each day - a number that honestly I think is really low, but it proves the point - that 18 games EVERY DAY are going to have someone draw all 4 copies of a card in their opener. You having one of the 18 is nothing notable.
[/quote]
Exceeepppppppt, it happens constantly in at least 3 out of 5 games I play. And others have reported the same thing.
Exceeepppppppt, it happens constantly in at least 3 out of 5 games I play. And others have reported the same thing.
Then prove it. You're the one making the outlandish accusations here, not me. Either you're the unluckiest player in the world of Arena, or you're lying to generate a reaction and getting whiny when you don't get it.
If you think it's so easy to show that the shuffler is broken, then SHOW us, don't just say it. Take a camera and set it up aimed at your computer screen and run through some matches of arena and - with no way to know it's being recorded - show us that the game is consistently giving you rigged hands with 3 and 4 copies of the same card. Provide some of your own video evidence that it's more than a random happenstance that just comes along, and I'll gladly change my tune.
Until then, I'm going to keep relying on math.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Top 16 - 2012 Indiana State Championships Currently Playing: GBStandard - Golgari Safari MidrangeBG RBWModern - Mardu PyromancerWBR RLegacy - Good Old Fashioned BurnR
I agree with BestMagicGamer. There seems to be something wrong with the randomization. I have been grinding a lot of games with MTG Arena and started to suspect something was off before ever hearing about it.
Setting aside the intentional best of 2 hand generator, multiple copies of the same card show up at unreasonable rates.
I understand statistics and have been running probabilities through the hypergeometric calculator. BestMagic is right, these very unlikely scenarios show up nearly every game. I notice the problem when I run 2 copies of a card in a deck. It is insane how often they show up together, or neither at all. I'm not talking about situations where I have one in my opening hand, then 15 cards in the deck later I see another. They are usually within 2-4 cards of each other.
I haven't wanted to take the time to gather large amounts of data et. in order to prove this. However I might set a notebook aside and start recording results.
Algernone, you seem a bit combative over this. "Keep relying on math." You said. Have you actually been gathering data points, making charts and using statistics? If not, you have no math to stand on. Instead you're saying "I assume Wizards has made the algorithm in such a way that it's random."
You're point about "of course some people will have these very statistically unlikely things happen to them because there are so many games being played" doesn't apply to those same outlandish statistics happening to the same players, over and over again.
I did pay attention and did the math for about 10 games in a row a while ago. It's unreasonable that nearly every game included things that are like 1 in 6,000 to 1 in 100,000 odds. How many times can one person keep hitting these odds before you believe them?
It would take a ridiculous amount of math to actually figure out how likely you are to actually hit things a certain amount of times. You would need to put in your entire deck via the number of copies of certain cards, factor in if you mulligan or shuffle your deck ever, then gather a ton of data without ever changing the card ratio while testing. Also, you would have to use the same mode of play while gathering this data. Who wants to do that?
What I will do, is start writing down all the suspicious data points I gather. There are too many stories out there of people who are using a hypergeometric calculators to figure out the odds of their hands saying things are off to be ignored.
Algernone, you seem a bit combative over this. "Keep relying on math." You said. Have you actually been gathering data points, making charts and using statistics? If not, you have no math to stand on. Instead you're saying "I assume Wizards has made the algorithm in such a way that it's random."
You're absolutely right that I'm assuming the algorithm produces random results. That's because the assumption is, as I'm sure you'll recognize since you're doing the stats, the Null Hypothesis. It by definition cannot be proven, but absent proof to the contrary it is to be held as valid. You're claiming to have proof to the contrary, and I want to see that proof. And furthermore, I want to not just hear a "take it from me this is happening" or look at a note paper that you claim shows what you drew, I want proof that I know is undoctored and unaffected by your clear bias.
And before you start showing random hands, let's also keep in mind that a 60 card deck has 60! ways it can be shuffled, or 8320987112741390144276341183223364380754172606361245952449277696409600000000000000 variations. Every hand you deal will have some degree of improbability to it, what I want to see is a clear pattern of the game being repetitive in handing you cards. Even better, if the RNG is rigged or faulty, you should be able to manipulate it. Do that, and I'll go straight to the mountaintops showing your proof to the world.
Or you can continue to blame your faults on everything except the person playing, and continue to be bad while the rest of us actually play the game.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Top 16 - 2012 Indiana State Championships Currently Playing: GBStandard - Golgari Safari MidrangeBG RBWModern - Mardu PyromancerWBR RLegacy - Good Old Fashioned BurnR
Exceeepppppppt, it happens constantly in at least 3 out of 5 games I play. And others have reported the same thing.
Then prove it. You're the one making the outlandish accusations here, not me. Either you're the unluckiest player in the world of Arena, or you're lying to generate a reaction and getting whiny when you don't get it.
If you think it's so easy to show that the shuffler is broken, then SHOW us, don't just say it. Take a camera and set it up aimed at your computer screen and run through some matches of arena and - with no way to know it's being recorded - show us that the game is consistently giving you rigged hands with 3 and 4 copies of the same card. Provide some of your own video evidence that it's more than a random happenstance that just comes along, and I'll gladly change my tune.
Until then, I'm going to keep relying on math.
What math are you relying on? the one that says it's normal to have something with a .0000007677% chance of happening, happen 50% of the time? Maybe if YOU do all the work, Wizards will shower you with the hugs and kisses you desire from them.
1) Desolator provides zero proof that any of that ever happened, any moreso than you did.
2) Desolator is a professional *****poster who is at best a biased source and at worst (and far more likely) a pathological liar
3) I can't prove that there's no rigging in the game, because a properly randomized deck would be, wait for it, properly randomized! Things will happen in approximately the rate they should. The default of "There is no rigging" cannot be proven, only disproven.
You're the one making the claim. Therefore you're the one who has to prove that you're not just making things up. So I'm going to make this very simple for you:
Top 16 - 2012 Indiana State Championships Currently Playing: GBStandard - Golgari Safari MidrangeBG RBWModern - Mardu PyromancerWBR RLegacy - Good Old Fashioned BurnR
1) Desolator provides zero proof that any of that ever happened, any moreso than you did.
2) Desolator is a professional *****poster who is at best a biased source and at worst (and far more likely) a pathological liar
3) I can't prove that there's no rigging in the game, because a properly randomized deck would be, wait for it, properly randomized! Things will happen in approximately the rate they should. The default of "There is no rigging" cannot be proven, only disproven.
You're the one making the claim. Therefore you're the one who has to prove that you're not just making things up. So I'm going to make this very simple for you:
POST PROOF OR SHUT UP
Actually, you COULD prove that it was properly randomized by taking down data points et. If you think you can't, you don't understand the math as well as you think you do. Also, aren't you making the claim that it IS random? You didn't show up here and say "Well I'm skeptical, but open to the idea if I see proof." Instead you say "I'M ON THE SIDE OF MATH." (Without actually proving your on the side of math.) You have stated that you know that it is random, therefore you are making a claim as well. Where is your proof?
Thing is you would basically have to be a data analyst working full time for a while to prove or disprove that the shuffler is totally random. No one has time to do that. You would need a sample size of about 1,000 games to really start getting to that point of statistical significance. Do we need to keep video footage of all of these games, then send you our data table to prove this to you? Of course no one is going to take the time to do all of that just to satisfy you.
I'm not claiming that I'm losing because I think there is a lack of randomization, so you can just throw that straw-man argument in the trash where it belongs.
Fact is anecdotal evidence is about as far as we're going to get with this.
I'm not saying that I know 100% for certain that the randomization doesn't work. However, myself and others feel like something is quite off. Are we not allowed to discuss this on a public forum lest it displease your highness?
I dont know about this folks. I've played multiple leagues multiple days, and have had far less 'wtf 4 in a row' and I'm playing UR Phoenix, with a ton of 4 of's.
EDIT: And no, I wont accept Desolator as my appeal to authority...
Drawing 4 ofs can happen, but it usually isn't that common unless you play cards that help churn through the deck. I've seen 4 Crackling Drakes once on UR Phoenix and 2 instances of 4 Radical Idea without digging further than 20 or so cards in about 40 or so games I've played with the deck.
Even in paper constructed, it isn't unreasonable to draw 3 of a certain 4 of in my deck. When you put 4 of something in a deck, it's a card you'd be happy to draw multiples.
It's true, you will draw multiples of a card in any given hand of Magic. More then drawing 4 of 1 card I've been more surprised by the drawing 2 of 2 cards in many games.
I think we can firmly establish that you can't really prove this one way or the other without spending many hours on it. I have felt in the past that I would draw too many copies of the same card. Given that when I play paper Magic, I organize my deck by card type and cmc and all lands together, I should actually be drawing MORE multiple copies of cards when I play paper Magic vs. Arena. If my shuffling technique is perfect in paper (I know it's not, it actually takes quite a long time to shuffle "perfectly") then I should only be receiving equal amounts of lower probability groupings in both paper and on Arena. Seems like Arena hits the multiple copies even more often.
On the other hand, I have started playing competitive constructed now instead of just ladder games. Seems like the best of 3 matches doesn't have the same problem as the single match ladder games. (But I don't play enough games or take data points to actually confirm this.) I wonder if the difference could be in the single match ladder game vs. competitive constructed games.
There's really no way to know one way or the other without massive amounts of work.
2011: Best Mafia Performance (Individual) - Best Newcomer
2012: Best (False?) Role Claim - Worst Town Performance (Group) - Best Mafia Performance (Group) - Best SK Performance - Best Overall Player
2013: Best Non-SK Neutral Performance
2014: Best Town Performance (Individual) - Best Town Performance (Group) - Most Interesting Role - Best Game - Best Overall Player
2015: Worst Mafia Performance (Group) - Best Read
2016: Best Town Performance (Group) - Best Town Player - Best Overall Player
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
I mean, obviously I know what you WANT to see, that this is a community-wide issue and uncovering the mass conspiracy of Wizards deliberately rigging games so streamers always win at the expense of all the scrubs. That you can justify poor play and poorer results by blaming the faulty randomization algorithm.
The problem is, that isn't the case. Most of us aren't having this issue, and most of us are quite fine with the randomization because we don't get bent out of shape when things happen on occasion. You have to remember, hundreds of thousands of games are played on Arena every day, even more so with the hype that TGA gave them. With so many people playing so many matches, it's a given that things that are statistical improbabilities happen, whether it's a 1-in-20 chance, a 1-in-2500 chance, or even a 1-in-50,000 chance. You're only seeing the one result that was unlikely, not taking into account the other 49,999 times where it didn't. What makes this argument keep popping up is that there's no way for the rational among us to disprove it: properly randomized decks won't have anything notable to make it obviously properly randomized, so you can constantly claim that it's rigged for lack of a counterexample.
The shuffler isn't against you, the game isn't against you, the company isn't against you. It's all in your head.
EDIT: Let's just assume, for the sake of implausibility, that you get 4 copies of a card in your opening hand of 7. Hypergeometric distribution shows us the probability of this happening is shown in the attachment. If you don't want to open it, it's 0.0071775% - or 7.17 instances out of every 100,000. Let's assume that a quarter million games are played each day - a number that honestly I think is really low, but it proves the point - that 18 games EVERY DAY are going to have someone draw all 4 copies of a card in their opener. You having one of the 18 is nothing notable.
Currently Playing:
GBStandard - Golgari Safari MidrangeBG
RBWModern - Mardu PyromancerWBR
RLegacy - Good Old Fashioned BurnR
Clan Contest 3 Mafia - Mafia Co-MVP
[/quote]
Exceeepppppppt, it happens constantly in at least 3 out of 5 games I play. And others have reported the same thing.
I̟̥͍̠ͅn̩͉̣͍̬͚ͅ ̬̬͖t̯̹̞̺͖͓̯̤h̘͍̬e͙̯͈̖̼̮ ̭̬f̺̲̲̪i͙͉̟̩̰r̪̝͚͈̝̥͍̝̲s̼̻͇̘̳͔ͅt̲̺̳̗̜̪̙ ̳̺̥̻͚̗ͅm̜̜̟̰͈͓͎͇o̝̖̮̝͇m̯̻̞̼̫̗͓̤e̩̯̬̮̩n͎̱̪̲̹͖t͇̖s̰̮ͅ,̤̲͙̻̭̻̯̹̰ ̖t̫̙̺̯͖͚̯ͅh͙̯̦̳̗̰̟e͖̪͉̼̯ ̪͕g̞̣͔a̗̦t̬̬͓͙̫̖̭̻e̩̻̯ ̜̖̦̖̤̭͙̬t̞̹̥̪͎͉ͅo͕͚͍͇̲͇͓̺ ̭̬͙͈̣̻t͈͍͙͓̫̖͙̩h̪̬̖̙e̗͈ ̗̬̟̞̺̤͉̯ͅa̦̯͚̙̜̮f͉͙̲̣̞̼t̪̤̞̣͚e̲͉̳̥r͇̪̙͚͓l̥̞̞͎̹̯̹ͅi͓̬f̮̥̬̞͈ͅe͎ ̟̩̤̳̠̯̩̯o̮̘̲p̟͚̣̞͉͓e͍̩̣n͔̼͕͚̜e̬̱d̼̘͎̖̹͍̮̠,͖̺̭̱̮ ̣̲͖̬̪̭̥a̪͚n̟̲̝̤̤̞̗d̘̱̗͇̮͕̳͕͔ ͖̞͉͎t̹̙͎h̰̱͉̗e̪̞̱̝̹̩ͅ ̠̱̩̭̦p̯̙e͓o̳͚̰̯̺̱̰͔̘p̬͎̱̣̼̩͇l̗̟̖͚̠e̱͉͔̱̦̬̟̙ ̖͚̪͔̼̦w̺̖̤̱e͖̗̻̦͓̖̘̜r̭̥e͔̹̫̱͕̦̰͕ ̗͔̠p̠̗͍͍̱̳̠r̰͔͎̰o͉̥͓̰͚̥s̟͚̹̱͔̣t͉̙̳̖͖̪̮r̥̘̥͙̹a͉̟̫̟̳̠̟̭t͈̜̰͈͎e̞̣̭̲̬ ͚̗̯̟͙i͍͖̰̘̦͖͉ṇ̮̻̯̦̲̩͍ ̦̮͚̫̤t͉͖̫͕ͅͅh͙̮̻̘̣̮̼e͕̺ ͙l͕̠͎̰̥i̲͓͉̲g̫̳̟͈͇̖h̠̦̖t͓̯͎̗ ̳̪̘̟̙̩̦o̫̲f̙͔̰̙̠ ̹̪̗͇̯t͖̼̼͉͖̬h̹͇̩e͚̖̺̤͉̹͕̪ ͚͓̭̝̺G͎̗̯̩o̫̯̮̟̮̳̘d̜̲͙̠-̩̳̯̲̗̜P̹̘̥͉̝h͍͈̗̖̝ͅa͍̗̮̼̗r̜̖͇̙̺a̭̺͔̞̳͈o̪̣͓̯̬͙̯̰̗h̖̦͈̥̯͔.͇̣̙̝
Then prove it. You're the one making the outlandish accusations here, not me. Either you're the unluckiest player in the world of Arena, or you're lying to generate a reaction and getting whiny when you don't get it.
If you think it's so easy to show that the shuffler is broken, then SHOW us, don't just say it. Take a camera and set it up aimed at your computer screen and run through some matches of arena and - with no way to know it's being recorded - show us that the game is consistently giving you rigged hands with 3 and 4 copies of the same card. Provide some of your own video evidence that it's more than a random happenstance that just comes along, and I'll gladly change my tune.
Until then, I'm going to keep relying on math.
Currently Playing:
GBStandard - Golgari Safari MidrangeBG
RBWModern - Mardu PyromancerWBR
RLegacy - Good Old Fashioned BurnR
Clan Contest 3 Mafia - Mafia Co-MVP
Setting aside the intentional best of 2 hand generator, multiple copies of the same card show up at unreasonable rates.
I understand statistics and have been running probabilities through the hypergeometric calculator. BestMagic is right, these very unlikely scenarios show up nearly every game. I notice the problem when I run 2 copies of a card in a deck. It is insane how often they show up together, or neither at all. I'm not talking about situations where I have one in my opening hand, then 15 cards in the deck later I see another. They are usually within 2-4 cards of each other.
I haven't wanted to take the time to gather large amounts of data et. in order to prove this. However I might set a notebook aside and start recording results.
Algernone, you seem a bit combative over this. "Keep relying on math." You said. Have you actually been gathering data points, making charts and using statistics? If not, you have no math to stand on. Instead you're saying "I assume Wizards has made the algorithm in such a way that it's random."
You're point about "of course some people will have these very statistically unlikely things happen to them because there are so many games being played" doesn't apply to those same outlandish statistics happening to the same players, over and over again.
I did pay attention and did the math for about 10 games in a row a while ago. It's unreasonable that nearly every game included things that are like 1 in 6,000 to 1 in 100,000 odds. How many times can one person keep hitting these odds before you believe them?
It would take a ridiculous amount of math to actually figure out how likely you are to actually hit things a certain amount of times. You would need to put in your entire deck via the number of copies of certain cards, factor in if you mulligan or shuffle your deck ever, then gather a ton of data without ever changing the card ratio while testing. Also, you would have to use the same mode of play while gathering this data. Who wants to do that?
What I will do, is start writing down all the suspicious data points I gather. There are too many stories out there of people who are using a hypergeometric calculators to figure out the odds of their hands saying things are off to be ignored.
You're absolutely right that I'm assuming the algorithm produces random results. That's because the assumption is, as I'm sure you'll recognize since you're doing the stats, the Null Hypothesis. It by definition cannot be proven, but absent proof to the contrary it is to be held as valid. You're claiming to have proof to the contrary, and I want to see that proof. And furthermore, I want to not just hear a "take it from me this is happening" or look at a note paper that you claim shows what you drew, I want proof that I know is undoctored and unaffected by your clear bias.
And before you start showing random hands, let's also keep in mind that a 60 card deck has 60! ways it can be shuffled, or 8320987112741390144276341183223364380754172606361245952449277696409600000000000000 variations. Every hand you deal will have some degree of improbability to it, what I want to see is a clear pattern of the game being repetitive in handing you cards. Even better, if the RNG is rigged or faulty, you should be able to manipulate it. Do that, and I'll go straight to the mountaintops showing your proof to the world.
Or you can continue to blame your faults on everything except the person playing, and continue to be bad while the rest of us actually play the game.
Currently Playing:
GBStandard - Golgari Safari MidrangeBG
RBWModern - Mardu PyromancerWBR
RLegacy - Good Old Fashioned BurnR
Clan Contest 3 Mafia - Mafia Co-MVP
What math are you relying on? the one that says it's normal to have something with a .0000007677% chance of happening, happen 50% of the time? Maybe if YOU do all the work, Wizards will shower you with the hugs and kisses you desire from them.
https://youtu.be/vdJv2CY6H7Y?t=630
2) Desolator is a professional *****poster who is at best a biased source and at worst (and far more likely) a pathological liar
3) I can't prove that there's no rigging in the game, because a properly randomized deck would be, wait for it, properly randomized! Things will happen in approximately the rate they should. The default of "There is no rigging" cannot be proven, only disproven.
You're the one making the claim. Therefore you're the one who has to prove that you're not just making things up. So I'm going to make this very simple for you:
POST PROOF OR SHUT UP
Currently Playing:
GBStandard - Golgari Safari MidrangeBG
RBWModern - Mardu PyromancerWBR
RLegacy - Good Old Fashioned BurnR
Clan Contest 3 Mafia - Mafia Co-MVP
Actually, you COULD prove that it was properly randomized by taking down data points et. If you think you can't, you don't understand the math as well as you think you do. Also, aren't you making the claim that it IS random? You didn't show up here and say "Well I'm skeptical, but open to the idea if I see proof." Instead you say "I'M ON THE SIDE OF MATH." (Without actually proving your on the side of math.) You have stated that you know that it is random, therefore you are making a claim as well. Where is your proof?
Thing is you would basically have to be a data analyst working full time for a while to prove or disprove that the shuffler is totally random. No one has time to do that. You would need a sample size of about 1,000 games to really start getting to that point of statistical significance. Do we need to keep video footage of all of these games, then send you our data table to prove this to you? Of course no one is going to take the time to do all of that just to satisfy you.
I'm not claiming that I'm losing because I think there is a lack of randomization, so you can just throw that straw-man argument in the trash where it belongs.
Fact is anecdotal evidence is about as far as we're going to get with this.
I'm not saying that I know 100% for certain that the randomization doesn't work. However, myself and others feel like something is quite off. Are we not allowed to discuss this on a public forum lest it displease your highness?
EDIT: And no, I wont accept Desolator as my appeal to authority...
Spirits
Even in paper constructed, it isn't unreasonable to draw 3 of a certain 4 of in my deck. When you put 4 of something in a deck, it's a card you'd be happy to draw multiples.
The Unidentified Fantastic Flying Girl.
EDH
Xenagos, the God of Stompy
The Gitrog Monster: Oppressive Value.
Marchesa, Marionette Master - Undying Robots
Yuriko, the Hydra Omnivore
I make dolls as a hobby.
Spirits
I think we can firmly establish that you can't really prove this one way or the other without spending many hours on it. I have felt in the past that I would draw too many copies of the same card. Given that when I play paper Magic, I organize my deck by card type and cmc and all lands together, I should actually be drawing MORE multiple copies of cards when I play paper Magic vs. Arena. If my shuffling technique is perfect in paper (I know it's not, it actually takes quite a long time to shuffle "perfectly") then I should only be receiving equal amounts of lower probability groupings in both paper and on Arena. Seems like Arena hits the multiple copies even more often.
On the other hand, I have started playing competitive constructed now instead of just ladder games. Seems like the best of 3 matches doesn't have the same problem as the single match ladder games. (But I don't play enough games or take data points to actually confirm this.) I wonder if the difference could be in the single match ladder game vs. competitive constructed games.
There's really no way to know one way or the other without massive amounts of work.
Have to say, I'm quite happy with arena overall.
{мы, тьма}
2012: Best (False?) Role Claim - Worst Town Performance (Group) - Best Mafia Performance (Group) - Best SK Performance - Best Overall Player
2013: Best Non-SK Neutral Performance
2014: Best Town Performance (Individual) - Best Town Performance (Group) - Most Interesting Role - Best Game - Best Overall Player
2015: Worst Mafia Performance (Group) - Best Read
2016: Best Town Performance (Group) - Best Town Player - Best Overall Player