I repeat: the shuffler is broken

[erutan2099]

I've said it before, I will say it again. The shuffler in this game is not good.

Case and point - I am literally winning bets consistently with my friends about what card I will draw next. If it were shuffled properly, I would not be able to do that.

[Sindrelari]

Definitely agree that the damn shuffler is rigged. I know land flood happens but it's never as one sided as it is in Magic Arena.

[Kurt Angle's Neck]

Originally posted by Sindrelari:

Definitely agree that the damn shuffler is rigged. I know land flood happens but it's never as one sided as it is in Magic Arena.

Well if you feel like it's rigged, then it must be. No reason to collect any data or crunch any numbers, we'll just base everything off of your feels.

[sajuukar]

So my "true random" deck with 40% chance to initially draw any land just gave me 2 lands out of 18 draws, with a follow-up game of 3 lands out of 16 draws...I could do the math, but it's soo far outside what the predicted margin of error should be, that i don't have to. Something is obviously wrong. Mulligan on the second game, doesn't seem to do anything. P.S. actual cards don't behave this way, I've drawn 12 lands out of 15 cards in a 30% chance deck, mind you, with each land I'm drawing that chance should go down for the number of cards in the deck compared to lands. My only issue is this doesn't just happen once or twice, but this happens at least one game every time I play. Pretty much done with MTGA

[Kurt Angle's Neck]

Originally posted by sajuukar:

.I could do the math, but it's soo far outside what the predicted margin of error should be

Here's your problem. Quit being lazy, do the math, and you'll see that it's well within the margins of expected probability. I'd do it for you just to prove my point, but you haven't provided enough information to do so (need deck size and number of lands).

[The_Dybbuk_King]

Originally posted by Alfred J. Kwak:

Originally posted by Skipspik:

Charge of proof is on the attack.
Please give us a statisticall analysis of the shuffler with the protocol you used to make such claim.

Some people did, not statisticall anomality - outside the two annouced tricks of quick play and BO1 hands

EDIT tricks in question are :
- there's a soft matchamking in Quick Play with the amount of rare/unco/mythic your deck have
- In BO1 (all mode) two hands are drawn, the sufflers keeps the one with the spell/land ratio closer to 50/50

i can tell you from my 20+ years of paper magic, i never, again 20 years, NEVER drew 9 lands in a row, only in arena, no single person in the universe is stupid enough to shuffle that bad

X: Doubt

[Kurt Angle's Neck]

Originally posted by Alfred J. Kwak:

i can tell you from my 20+ years of paper magic, i never, again 20 years, NEVER drew 9 lands in a row, only in arena, no single person in the universe is stupid enough to shuffle that bad

You clearly aren't following the rules when it comes to shuffling.

Originally posted by MTR 3.10 Card Shuffling:

Decks must be randomized at the start of every game and whenever an instruction requires it. Randomization is defined as bringing the deck to a state where no player can have any information regarding the order or position of cards in any portion of the deck.

If you have not shuffled your deck to the point that you are no longer able to have information regarding the order/position of cards, then you have not properly shuffled.
Source[blogs.magicjudges.org]

[mwesthoff]

Originally posted by Kurt Angle's Neck:

Originally posted by sajuukar:

.I could do the math, but it's soo far outside what the predicted margin of error should be

Here's your problem. Quit being lazy, do the math, and you'll see that it's well within the margins of expected probability. I'd do it for you just to prove my point, but you haven't provided enough information to do so (need deck size and number of lands).

Coming from the person who thinks being on the play instead of the draw makes no statistical difference in the win/lose rate. "Duh, do da math", "Duh".

[Kurt Angle's Neck]

Originally posted by mwesthoff:

Coming from the person who thinks being on the play instead of the draw makes no statistical difference in the win/lose rate. "Duh, do da math", "Duh".

Uhhh, nope, I'm very aware of the difference. Another weird fantasy you've decided to conjure up about me.

[The_Dybbuk_King]

Originally posted by Kurt Angle's Neck:

Originally posted by Alfred J. Kwak:

i can tell you from my 20+ years of paper magic, i never, again 20 years, NEVER drew 9 lands in a row, only in arena, no single person in the universe is stupid enough to shuffle that bad

You clearly aren't following the rules when it comes to shuffling.

Originally posted by MTR 3.10 Card Shuffling:

Decks must be randomized at the start of every game and whenever an instruction requires it. Randomization is defined as bringing the deck to a state where no player can have any information regarding the order or position of cards in any portion of the deck.

If you have not shuffled your deck to the point that you are no longer able to have information regarding the order/position of cards, then you have not properly shuffled.
Source[blogs.magicjudges.org]

Hard facts here.

Ol dude either played like 3 games in 20 years, or never properly shuffled his cards.

Probably pile shuffles face up.

[Ha 何豪源]

they refuse to add a fair starting order and rather let you go 2nd 18 times in a row, than just implementing it. for what reason they wont add it? because it will waste more of your time, so they can boost up the playerbase and activity. and im certain with that evil behavior in mind, they will rig the shuffler too

they dont care about cheaters in their main pro tour, so why should they care in a virtual online game? they are just evil beings with no dignity

[The_Dybbuk_King]

Originally posted by Ha 何豪源:

they refuse to add a fair starting order and rather let you go 2nd 18 times in a row, than just implementing it. for what reason they wont add it? because it will waste more of your time, so they can boost up the playerbase and activity. and im certain with that evil behavior in mind, they will rig the shuffler too

they dont care about cheaters in their main pro tour, so why should they care in a virtual online game? they are just evil beings with no dignity

Originally posted by the rules of the card game you are playing:

103.1. At the start of a game, the players determine which one of them will choose who takes the first turn. In the first game of a match (including a single-game match), the players may use any mutually agreeable method (flipping a coin, rolling dice, etc.) to do so. In a match of several games, the loser of the previous game chooses who takes the first turn. If the previous game was a draw, the player who made the choice in that game makes the choice in this game. The player chosen to take the first turn is the starting player. The game’s default turn order begins with the starting player and proceeds clockwise.

By playing MTGA, you agree to the game choosing who plays first as the means for choosing who plays first.

As has been said to you a hundred times before, if you want to alternate starting turns, play Bo3.

Some rando using sleight of hand in the pro tour or whatever FNM event you are complaining about this week will not affect your RNG rolls.

[John-Silver]

Oh god I have strongbad's "the system is down" stuck in my head but it's "the shuffler is rigged"

[sajuukar]

Originally posted by Kurt Angle's Neck:

Originally posted by sajuukar:

.I could do the math, but it's soo far outside what the predicted margin of error should be

Here's your problem. Quit being lazy, do the math, and you'll see that it's well within the margins of expected probability. I'd do it for you just to prove my point, but you haven't provided enough information to do so (need deck size and number of lands).

Alright for draws that seem to happen all the time, I'll just use the hand I'm complaining about, 18 draws @ 40% has an expectation value of 7.2 lands with a variance of 2.68 lands. What does this mean? It means that I should have over 70% chance to be within 4 lands and 10 lands, and there's less than 5% chance that i should be drawing 2 lands, or over 12. Now it happens, but I don't play 20 games for this to happen, it happens on my first second or 3rd game. Something is off here enough to warrent people complaining since release. Nothing wrong here...Ok if you don't like bi-nomial logic. Other decks with less land and thus a smaller variance will have greater impacts on the probability. I'll just draw 5 lands with a followup 6 draws of lands on a 33% land deck. It's way outside expectation.

You complainers about needing statistical proof go learn something so you can understand what people are talking about before pointing the finger at those that see the obvious in hey I drew 11 lands in 13 cards with approximately 33% chance to get a land.

You could statistically prove that it's possible our star the sun can quantum tunnel to the center of our galaxy, yea it doesn't happen, unless you're in a make-believe simulator like MTGA which can't shuffle cards to produce a result like a normal deck of cards on earth. Insider data doesn't count, they'll always say working properly or as intended.

Good thing it's free and I won't be spending money on this until they fix the issue. Doesn't seem to be anytime soon because the general consensus is if you don't like it leave.

[John-Silver]

Originally posted by sajuukar:

Originally posted by Kurt Angle's Neck:

Here's your problem. Quit being lazy, do the math, and you'll see that it's well within the margins of expected probability. I'd do it for you just to prove my point, but you haven't provided enough information to do so (need deck size and number of lands).

Alright for draws that seem to happen all the time, I'll just use the hand I'm complaining about, 18 draws @ 40% has an expectation value of 7.2 lands with a variance of 2.68 lands. What does this mean? It means that I should have over 70% chance to be within 4 lands and 10 lands, and there's less than 5% chance that i should be drawing 2 lands, or over 12. Now it happens, but I don't play 20 games for this to happen, it happens on my first second or 3rd game. Something is off here enough to warrent people complaining since release. Nothing wrong here...Ok if you don't like bi-nomial logic. Other decks with less land and thus a smaller variance will have greater impacts on the probability. I'll just draw 5 lands with a followup 6 draws of lands on a 33% land deck. It's way outside expectation.

You complainers about needing statistical proof go learn something so you can understand what people are talking about before pointing the finger at those that see obvious.

How does your formula account for the handsmoother? I'm more than certain it picks your three hands than essentialy shuffles you deck between each generated hand it picks from and doesn't log the deck order from when it drew the hand it chooses to keep, this skews everyones formulas, the deck doesn't remain in the order it was when the hand was drawn, it gets a free shuffle or it uses the shuffle from the last generated seed, I think this is effecting things and should not be done this way.

[Kurt Angle's Neck]

Originally posted by sajuukar:

Alright for draws that seem to happen all the time, I'll just use the hand I'm complaining about, 18 draws @ 40% has an expectation value of 7.2 lands with a variance of 2.68 lands. What does this mean?

What does that mean? Well.. it means that you seemingly have no understanding of the basic fundamentals in probability, for one.
Tell me how many cards are in your deck and how many lands, and I'll give you a free lesson.