21 Land deck = only Land draws, 20 Land deck = never get Land

[Brave Pixel]

what's the deal with the coding of this game

[Brujah]

This happens to me too. Additionally stacks of lands of the same category. The shuffler is getting worse every day

[Kurt Angle's Neck]

Sounds like confirmation bias to me... let's see the evidence.

[The New Crusader]

Kurt Angle's Neck の投稿を引用：

Sounds like confirmation bias to me... let's see the evidence.

In fairness, Wizards has been caught with their hand in the cookie jar doing this sort of thing before. A guy named Douglass looked at one million games. and found that the shuffler was off by 3-6%. It was eventually found that clumping was the problem. Cards that you had already drawn were somehow being included as something that you could potentially draw again. And lest you think this failure of spectacular proportions was a mistake, somehow all the errors in randomization go away if you mulligan once. Since the study was conducted, the issue has since been fixed, but given that third-party trackers have since been blocked on Arena, we have no way of knowing for sure if the shuffler is once again broken.

Also, the sort of thing OP is complaining about has become a trend in the wider gaming industry in recent years. It's called EOMM (Engagement Optimized Matchmaking). It was patented by Activision and since the patent was published, pretty much every video game developer has created their own version of it. Basically, it was discovered that either winning too many games in a row or losing too many games in a row caused people to stop playing. To "solve" this issue, they engineered a match-maker that is designed to avoid that happening as often as possible. And EOMM plays dirty. To ensure the desired outcome, it will change in-game variables that should be the same for all participants. In Call of Duty, which is where the original version of this system debuted, things like weapon damage and accuracy were altered. Depending on how much the game wants you to lose, shots that 100% should've connected inexplicably do not.

[Kurt Angle's Neck]

STAW PRATENUM の投稿を引用：

A guy named Douglass looked at one million games.

Yep, I've read the Reddit thread many times.

STAW PRATENUM の投稿を引用：

and found that the shuffler was off by 3-6%

found that the shuffler was off by 3-6% in the opening hand, before first mulligan

STAW PRATENUM の投稿を引用：

It was eventually found that clumping was the problem.

Clumping is not a problem, and is expected to occur in a truly random shuffling.

STAW PRATENUM の投稿を引用：

And lest you think this failure of spectacular proportions was a mistake, somehow all the errors in randomization go away if you mulligan once.

It's not some big mystery, the opening hand goes through a hand-smoothing operation that causes it to not be fully random. WotC is open about this, and that is the exact way that things are intended to work.

STAW PRATENUM の投稿を引用：

Since the study was conducted, the issue has since been fixed, but given that third-party trackers have since been blocked on Arena, we have no way of knowing for sure if the shuffler is once again broken.

It was never a problem to begin with, and there are absolutely still third-party trackers that are active (to include MTGA tool, which is the one that was used in the study you're referencing).

STAW PRATENUM の投稿を引用：

Also, the sort of thing OP is complaining about has become a trend in the wider gaming industry in recent years. It's called EOMM (Engagement Optimized Matchmaking). It was patented by Activision and since the patent was published, pretty much every video game developer has created their own version of it. Basically, it was discovered that either winning too many games in a row or losing too many games in a row caused people to stop playing. To "solve" this issue, they engineered a match-maker that is designed to avoid that happening as often as possible. And EOMM plays dirty. To ensure the desired outcome, it will change in-game variables that should be the same for all participants. In Call of Duty, which is where the original version of this system debuted, things like weapon damage and accuracy were altered. Depending on how much the game wants you to lose, shots that 100% should've connected inexplicably do not.

This entire paragraph is a strawman argument. Other companies/games using unfair practices doesn't mean it's happening here also.

[Berserkr]

Why do you even bother Kurt it's not like new players aren't gonna play Arena because some randos leave a bad review or make an umpteenth thousandth thread about the game being rigged, it's MTG new players will join the game regardless

[The New Crusader]

Kurt Angle's Neck の投稿を引用：

STAW PRATENUM の投稿を引用：

A guy named Douglass looked at one million games.

Yep, I've read the Reddit thread many times.

STAW PRATENUM の投稿を引用：

and found that the shuffler was off by 3-6%

found that the shuffler was off by 3-6% in the opening hand, before first mulligan

STAW PRATENUM の投稿を引用：

It was eventually found that clumping was the problem.

Clumping is not a problem, and is expected to occur in a truly random shuffling.

STAW PRATENUM の投稿を引用：

And lest you think this failure of spectacular proportions was a mistake, somehow all the errors in randomization go away if you mulligan once.

It's not some big mystery, the opening hand goes through a hand-smoothing operation that causes it to not be fully random. WotC is open about this, and that is the exact way that things are intended to work.

STAW PRATENUM の投稿を引用：

Since the study was conducted, the issue has since been fixed, but given that third-party trackers have since been blocked on Arena, we have no way of knowing for sure if the shuffler is once again broken.

It was never a problem to begin with, and there are absolutely still third-party trackers that are active (to include MTGA tool, which is the one that was used in the study you're referencing).

STAW PRATENUM の投稿を引用：

Also, the sort of thing OP is complaining about has become a trend in the wider gaming industry in recent years. It's called EOMM (Engagement Optimized Matchmaking). It was patented by Activision and since the patent was published, pretty much every video game developer has created their own version of it. Basically, it was discovered that either winning too many games in a row or losing too many games in a row caused people to stop playing. To "solve" this issue, they engineered a match-maker that is designed to avoid that happening as often as possible. And EOMM plays dirty. To ensure the desired outcome, it will change in-game variables that should be the same for all participants. In Call of Duty, which is where the original version of this system debuted, things like weapon damage and accuracy were altered. Depending on how much the game wants you to lose, shots that 100% should've connected inexplicably do not.

This entire paragraph is a strawman argument. Other companies/games using unfair practices doesn't mean it's happening here also.

>Clumping is expected to occur in truly random shuffling.

You're not wrong. In truly random shuffling, you do expect clumping, as in two cards being next to each other. What you do NOT expect is you have three copies of a card in your deck but when the game goes to draw a card randomly, it thinks you have four. TBH it's not even really clumping. I don't know what it is but it's weird.

>It's not some big mystery, the opening hand goes through a hand-smoothing operation that causes it to not be fully random. WotC is open about this, and that is the exact way that things are intended to work.

I know how WOTC says it works. So let me tell you because you DON'T seem to know. When Arena draws your opening hand in Best-of-1, because this is allegedly turned off for Best-of-3, it draws hands from two identical copies of your deck and gives you the hand with the land-to-spell ratio that most closely makes the average CMC of your deck. HOWEVER, with a system like this, one would expect the number of land draws you get during the game to be consistent with the number of lands in your starting hand, which it isn't, because it's not an independent variable. How many lands you draw in your opening hand affects how many lands you expect to draw during your draw phases.

>It was never a problem to begin with, and there are absolutely still third-party trackers that are active (to include MTGA tool, which is the one that was used in the study you're referencing).

Yeah. I looked into it and I'm wrong about this one. Congratulations, a single sentence out of your entire deboonking was accurate.

>This entire paragraph is a strawman argument. Other companies/games using unfair practices doesn't mean it's happening here also.

First of all, you don't know what "strawman" means do you? If anything, I was poisoning the well not strawmanning. Second of all, do you really believe that WOTC hasn't implemented EOMM, when they've implemented every other, far more overt predatory monetization tactic that F2P games have been infamous for for over a decade?

[Kurt Angle's Neck]

Berserkr の投稿を引用：

Why do you even bother Kurt it's not like new players aren't gonna play Arena because some randos leave a bad review or make an umpteenth thousandth thread about the game being rigged, it's MTG new players will join the game regardless

Oh, I'm not worried about player retention at all, I just loath disinformation. I'm aware it's usually petty and trivial, but it makes me feel better to provide the correct information. And I do it, not necessarily to convince the person I'm responding to, but so that anyone else who comes along and reads these threads is able to make a properly informed decision and break the cycle of spreading false claims.
I know... it's cringe... I'm okay with that.

[The New Crusader]

Kurt Angle's Neck の投稿を引用：

Berserkr の投稿を引用：

Why do you even bother Kurt it's not like new players aren't gonna play Arena because some randos leave a bad review or make an umpteenth thousandth thread about the game being rigged, it's MTG new players will join the game regardless

Oh, I'm not worried about player retention at all, I just loath disinformation. I'm aware it's usually petty and trivial, but it makes me feel better to provide the correct information. And I do it, not necessarily to convince the person I'm responding to, but so that anyone else who comes along and reads these threads is able to make a properly informed decision and break the cycle of spreading false claims.
I know... it's cringe... I'm okay with that.

The only one spreading misinformation here is you, buddy. Your entire deboonking was a bunch of nonsense that falls apart if you think about it for more than a second.

[Kurt Angle's Neck]

STAW PRATENUM の投稿を引用：

What you do NOT expect is you have three copies of a card in your deck but when the game goes to draw a card randomly, it thinks you have four.

What's leading you to believe that the game "thinks" there are four copies of a card instead of 3? (Don't just point back to the reddit thread, I've read it many times, give me something specific)

STAW PRATENUM の投稿を引用：

with a system like this, one would expect the number of land draws you get during the game to be consistent with the number of lands in your starting hand

What does this even mean? Consistent in what way?

STAW PRATENUM の投稿を引用：

How many lands you draw in your opening hand affects how many lands you expect to draw during your draw phases.

The amount of lands you draw in your opening hand affects the probability of drawing a land, sure. The probability of drawing a land will change with every card that is drawn (and/or milled). How is that relevant to any of your claims?

STAW PRATENUM の投稿を引用：

First of all, you don't know what "strawman" means do you? If anything, I was poisoning the well not strawmanning.

You're right, I used the wrong term. It was really more of a red herring than anything.

STAW PRATENUM の投稿を引用：

Second of all, do you really believe that WOTC hasn't implemented EOMM, when they've implemented every other, far more overt predatory monetization tactic that F2P games have been infamous for for over a decade?

I haven't seen any evidence to indicate that's the case. Do you have some that you'd like to present instead of just throwing out baseless assertions?

STAW PRATENUM の投稿を引用：

Your entire deboonking was a bunch of nonsense that falls apart if you think about it for more than a second.

Oh. Well, since you say so, I guess I'll just take your word on everything...
Not.

[The New Crusader]

Kurt Angle's Neck の投稿を引用：

STAW PRATENUM の投稿を引用：

What you do NOT expect is you have three copies of a card in your deck but when the game goes to draw a card randomly, it thinks you have four.

What's leading you to believe that the game "thinks" there are four copies of a card instead of 3? (Don't just point back to the reddit thread, I've read it many times, give me something specific)

STAW PRATENUM の投稿を引用：

with a system like this, one would expect the number of land draws you get during the game to be consistent with the number of lands in your starting hand

What does this even mean? Consistent in what way?

STAW PRATENUM の投稿を引用：

How many lands you draw in your opening hand affects how many lands you expect to draw during your draw phases.

The amount of lands you draw in your opening hand affects the probability of drawing a land, sure. The probability of drawing a land will change with every card that is drawn (and/or milled). How is that relevant to any of your claims?

STAW PRATENUM の投稿を引用：

First of all, you don't know what "strawman" means do you? If anything, I was poisoning the well not strawmanning.

You're right, I used the wrong term. It was really more of a red herring than anything.

STAW PRATENUM の投稿を引用：

Second of all, do you really believe that WOTC hasn't implemented EOMM, when they've implemented every other, far more overt predatory monetization tactic that F2P games have been infamous for for over a decade?

I haven't seen any evidence to indicate that's the case. Do you have some that you'd like to present instead of just throwing out baseless assertions?

STAW PRATENUM の投稿を引用：

Your entire deboonking was a bunch of nonsense that falls apart if you think about it for more than a second.

Oh. Well, since you say so, I guess I'll just take your word on everything...
Not.

That's a lot of words to say "I haven't actually read the Reddit thread I claim to be so familiar with" and "I can't actually refute my opponent's argument so I'm retreating to the classic leftist tactic of trying to confuse people by getting my opponent to over-define every word they say until their argument becomes meaningless."

[Kurt Angle's Neck]

STAW PRATENUM の投稿を引用：

That's a lot of words to say "I haven't actually read the Reddit thread I claim to be so familiar with" and "I can't actually refute my opponent's argument so I'm retreating to the classic leftist tactic of trying to confuse people by getting my opponent to over-define every word they say until their argument becomes meaningless."

Wow, the hypocrisy... yikes.
I've responded to each and every thing you've said with a thoughtful response. You're the one that's now avoiding honest conversation.

[Argstein]

Brave Pixel の投稿を引用：

21 Land deck = only Land draws, 20 Land deck = never get Land
what's the deal with the coding of this game

hyuck

[Brujah]

Countless players complain about the shuffler, if the experience of these players is not evidence that the game is rigged or that the shuffler is not working as it should, then I don't know what evidence could be.

[GarbageCollector]

Dread Specter の投稿を引用：

Countless players complain about the shuffler, if the experience of these players is not evidence that the game is rigged or that the shuffler is not working as it should, then I don't know what evidence could be.

People can be wrong about things.

[mwesthoff]

The only way I have ever gotten around it with a 20 land deck is to drop the average mana down to 1.6 with no cards greater than 3 mana.

I end up using mana fixing cards to drop land for new cards almost every game once I establish 3 land on the board.