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.
Have to say, I'm quite happy with arena overall.
- Registered User
Member for 3 years, 7 months, and 9 days
Last active Wed, Dec, 12 2018 19:55:20
- 0 Followers
- 682 Total Posts
- 47 Thanks
Dec 12, 2018 Posted in: MTG Arena
Dec 12, 2018Posted in: MTG ArenaQuote from Algernone25 »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?
Dec 11, 2018Oh crap! I figured it out. As Firstsword mentioned previously you must select "All Play Modes" first, then pull up the play option. That then gives you every single play option featured. The first one only gives you 4. Sorry for the confusion. Seems a bit counter intuitive. There was a time when it seemed like every play option was put on the welcome page if you cycled between the settings. Now must cycle to "All Play Modes" and also open the sidebar in order to see it.Posted in: MTG Arena
Hopefully they will fix this by offering all play modes in the sidebar no matter where you hit play from.
Dec 11, 2018I 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.Posted in: MTG Arena
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.
Dec 11, 2018Competitive Constructed has gone offline again! I'm a sad Magic player now. Wasn't working yesterday either. Does anyone have the ability to play competitive constructed with buy in or on the ladder? I'm wondering if only some people are losing access to it at a time.Posted in: MTG Arena
Hope they get this figured out. I'm so stoked that I built a good standard deck and finally have a sideboard for it. That's something I wouldn't have the $ for in paper. I want to use it!
Dec 7, 2018I checked the menu back then to. I have seen it fluctuate even between sign in's in the same day when it first appeared. Now it's been consistently there. To be expected with a Beta. Glad to see they are consistently adding more features.Posted in: MTG Arena
I'm quite a happy Magic player now!!!!
Dec 6, 2018It was not available before. I saw your previous post, and I was still unable to access competitive play despite your claim. Perhaps they didn't fully implement it before. Also, ladder competitive play hasn't been offered since they started the open beta, so seems like news to me. Especially since they don't mention any of this in their welcome screen.Posted in: MTG Arena
Dec 5, 2018Heads up! Wizards added competitive constructed back into the mix. It is not on the welcome page. Instead hit play, then select the mode. The additionally added competitive play to the ladder games! That means 3 game matches with sideboards, and free to play. Nice!!!Posted in: MTG Arena
Nov 29, 2018Thanks for the heads up. Do you think I should be considering experimental frenzy as a possible choice. I thought about it some more and perhaps it is good. I don't need to draw cards until I'm pretty much out of them. Also it's not like paying an additional 4 mana after drawing a bunch of good cards to destroy is much to ask with all the ramp going on in our deck.Posted in: Multiplayer Commander Decklists
I have Lifecrafter's Bestiary in already. Elemental bond has been in and out of the deck for me, I believe it's currently out. My reasoning is that I don't usually want to play draw card spells before playing a big creature. All my early turns are used on ramp spells then play Xenagos, then get creature out asap. I've just found that bond sits in hand, then might not do anything for a while. Or play it early at the cost of being behind a turn on the Xenagos+Big creature combo. I like bestiary better because it will keep scrying even if I can't draw a card off of it on the next turn.
Also the reason I'm not as big a fan of the wheel type effects is because my playgroup doesn't understand the value of drawing cards. I end up filling up a bunch of opponents' hands that were almost empty anyway.
Nov 28, 2018Edit: Heads up! Reprint of Balefire Dragon in Ultimate Masters has brought it down to under $6 and it will probably drop from there a bit. Also Gamble gets a reprint. Time to pick them up soon.Posted in: Multiplayer Commander Decklists
Question for y'all. Red keeps printing these "play a card until end of turn" effects and I'm thinking of running one or two. These are obviously budget friendly options as the original wheel or Sylvan Library are better. However, for one looking for cheap alternatives, what about these:
There's probably a card or two missing from this list as well, please let me know of similar cards I'm missing.
I was thinking of replacing something like Wheel of fate Reforge the soul or hunter's insight all of which I'm currently running. Outpost siege looks like the best as it can get you lands into play and is also an enchantment, the hardest of permanents to remove.
Chandra looks good because of the flexibility between ramp and "card draw" that 4 damage ability could come in handy as well in a deck without much creature removal. Downside is a planeswalker which always gain attention, and are easy to remove compared to enchantments. I could see sticking this early and running away with the game, or playing it late game use it's mana ability to make it a 2 cost planeswalker while still having mana for another spell. Xenagos is offensive however, and we won't have many creatures up for blocking to keep chandra around.
Experimental frenzy doesn't seem flexible enough to include and too much downside. Just included it to show another of these "new" effects showing up in red.
What about The immortal sun? Too expensive cmc for truly competitive edh I know, but my group is slower...
Nov 26, 2018Posted in: MTG ArenaQuote from Havrekjex »I have not seen the video you've linked, so I can't comment on that in particular, but I would advice you to take anything DesolatorMagic with a grain of salt. And by grain I actually mean a truck load. Like, Lantern Control opponent levels of salt. The guy is way out there, and he tends to view everything in the most negative and malicious way to drive views.
This, of course, is my personal perspective, which you can feel free to ignore or disagree with. I'm just throwing it out there.
I can totally understand the skepticism when it comes to evaluating probability and also DesolatorMagic's claims. Probability is nearly impossible for a human to perceive from merely gathering results from your own gaming time. Here's where I'll tell you I've taken many university classes on understanding statistics and analyzing data. I understand we have certain inherit psychological functions in our brain that predispose us to biases when it comes to understanding data.
DesolaterMagic is totally arrogant, and does have splashy headline type of information/sometimes wrong info. provided in his videos. However, I believe that he does understand mathematics (I know enough to understand that he's explaining these types of segments pcorrectly) and perhaps programming (that's just a hunch.) Yes, he's rude, overly dramatic and/or straight up wrong about some things, but not his explanation of mathematics.
I've been playing 60 card paper Magic for quite a few years now. I'm telling you something doesn't add up with Arena's randomization system. Yes, improper shuffling can be a thing as mentioned right above this post. I've watched multiple videos on different shuffling techniques and how to reliably check to see if they are random before. I know how to shuffle. In fact the way I group cards prior to shuffling (each copy of every card lined up next to it in converted cmc in order) in paper Magic would guarantee that more copies of the same card are EVEN MORE LIKELY to put those cards together compared to a truly mathematical randomization.
FYI I am entering actual gameplay data into a hypogeometric calculator to provide you with % data points.
I noticed that something was obviously wrong with MTG arena's shuffling/randomization pattern well before watching the video (I'm not taking about the best of 2 hands for lands in ladder games part which is actually explained in the tips.) You don't even need to watch the video to gain an understanding. Just start using a hypogeometric calculator with gameplay results and you'll see...
PLEASE! By all means be skeptical! Once you have heard about this dual copies of cards showing up, it can't be unseen. (I know that's a normal psychological trap, this extends beyond that.) Take mental notes, if not actual notes by using statistical methods. I'd be at the point of taking actual data points down if I had more time. Telling you, multiple copies of the same card show up way too often. I believe this applies to even non-basic land cards too. Sure, it's easy to misunderstand statistics. When nearly all of your games have instances of 1% or much less chance of cards occurring, it's time to sit up and take notice.
Anyway, hope to keep seeing reports for or against this!
Nov 26, 2018I've been playing for free minus the $5 I spent on the intro gift deal. I finally had just worked my deck up to enter into the competitive constructed when it disappeared. Doh! This should definitely be available all the time when this hits full release. Hope wizards corrects it!Posted in: MTG Arena
Nov 26, 2018Great video here on theorized and actual problems with MTG Arena by DesolaterMagic channel on YouTube:Posted in: MTG Arena
I've finally been getting annoyed enough to seek out the forums and see what other people are experiencing. My biggest problem is the number of lands in hand issue mentioned in recent posts. Second biggest is the "multiple copies of cards showing up at once problem." As explained in the video it is obvious that there is a flaw with the randomness of how often multiple copies of a card will show up. Basically, if you have a card in your opening hand, or draw into a copy, you are much more likely to see a 2nd 3rd or 4th copy based on already having one as the game progresses. For example, I have 3 Ravenous Chupacabras in my deck. My opening hand contain 2 of them (3.25% chance of that happening) then I somehow manage to draw my 3rd an final copy within a 3 draws (only .35% chance of that happening!!!) Of course this is a single instance can be explained away by stastics. However, these scenarios play out so often that it truly defies actual probability. If I have only 2 copies of a card, I magically often see both copies within a single game, or none at all. I'll draw 2 of the same card in a row (.34% chance of that happening with 4 copies in a deck.)
This problem is so bad it has started to affect how I even build the decks in the first place. I play G/B Midrange and feel forced to play numerous explore creatures, Adventurous Impulse and recently I'm trying out the Discovery//Dispersal card to mitigate this lack of randomness. After putting in 2 copies of Discovery, I drew both of them in my hand on my 2 game with them in the deck. Chances of drawing both copies out of 2 in your hand is 1.1%
This lack of randomness is really hurting how my deck functions. It is really making me want to play more 1 ofs for my higher cost spells, as I don't want to increase the risk of me drawing all high cmc spells in the begining of the game due to a lack of variance. It is forcing me to play more and more cards that can bust through pockets of dual copies, or as you all have experienced the EXTREMELY unlikely land pockets.
I like that the video goes into why Wizards is doing this, which makes a kind of sense from Wizards perspective. He thinks that this lack or randomness is designed to keep people from accruing too many gold/wins in a day, and to keep lesser players from accruing too many losses.
Anyway, all of this is bullcrap. We can make excuses about "Oh it's just the Beta version" but that is bullcrap when it comes to spitting in the face of probability. The best skill (arugably) a player can have in this game is to be able to understand and predict probablity. It doesn't matter if this is the Beta version or the finished product when it comes to having a correct algorithm to have probability in regards to drawing cards.
Two options here: Either the developers don't understand probability, or they are purposefully manipulating it in order to achive some end. Either one of these is a TERRIBLE sign. They are trying to get too fancy with this. Just make everything random as it should be. Fix the economy in other ways, not by making their own rules to change how statistics works.
- To post a comment, please login or register a new account.