SEVEN LAND IN A ROW WHAT THE HELL!!??

[thesouthtownrat]

sixth game now where this has happened. Not cool. solo battles seem to work fine, this only happens to me during verses. I guess its just back down to rank two forever :(

[Lo]

This game gives a false random... it dont know how they do that

[Lars]

It is kinda silly how no matter how the land distribution is, you typically start with a hand of 0-1 lands, and no lands in the first 5 draws. OR 7 lands opening hand with 4 lands in the next 5 draws. :)

I know it is just confirmation bias and its just as likely to be a regular hand, but it sure doesn't feel like it.

[Xenial Jesse]

For a rough example lets assume you have 24 lands in a 60-card deck and are drawing from nothing. The odds of pulling 7 lands in a row are 24/60 * 23/59 * 22/58 * 21/57 * 20/56 * 19/55 * 18/54.

Which is 9 times in 10000, or just under 1 in 1000.

If 100 people play 10 games each, this is very likely to happen to one of them once.

But if one person plays 100 games, the odds of it happening to that person are around 1 in 10.
The odds of it happening twice in that 100 games are around 1 in 100.
The odds of it happening 6 times as you say are around 1 in a million.

Assuming you've only played 100 games.

If 10,000 people are playing 100 games, the odds of this happening to one of those people are back down to around 1 in 100.

A lot of people play a lot of games. The unlikely things are very likely to happen to some people some times.


I'm not defending the game at all, because it's a piece of garbage. I'm just basically saying yeah, numbers can do that.

[conantheimp]

What Deef said. The game's RNG is fine, but humans aren't capable of discerning true randomness. We look for patterns and complete the shape. If you see a bunch of mana floods or droughts in a row, of course it'll seem like the game is rigged.

Of course, the game is rigged, but only because it's full of glitches around the rules and cards not working right all the time. (Seriously, WHY does it give you the chance to do nothing with a card you just cast that does ONE thing? Not even a warning?)

[peter.achde]

Originally posted by Deef:

For a rough example lets assume you have 24 lands in a 60-card deck and are drawing from nothing. The odds of pulling 7 lands in a row are 24/60 * 23/59 * 22/58 * 21/57 * 20/56 * 19/55 * 18/54.

This calculations are wrong because you didn't consider the starting hand. If your starting hand is bad, better mulligan. If you assume 3 lands in starting hand you get this numbers:

21/53 * 20/52 * 19/51 * 18/50 * 17/49 * 16/48 * 15/47 = 0.00075436406

[St. Pillow The Biter]

Originally posted by peter.achde:

Originally posted by Deef:

For a rough example lets assume you have 24 lands in a 60-card deck and are drawing from nothing. The odds of pulling 7 lands in a row are 24/60 * 23/59 * 22/58 * 21/57 * 20/56 * 19/55 * 18/54.

This calculations are wrong because you didn't consider the starting hand. If your starting hand is bad, better mulligan. If you assume 3 lands in starting hand you get this numbers:

21/53 * 20/52 * 19/51 * 18/50 * 17/49 * 16/48 * 15/47 = 0.00075436406

That formula assumes the prior 7 cards are gone for some reason. You still start from a 60 card deck.

[St. Pillow The Biter]

There is something off about the shuffling and I never have this issue with paper magic.

I frequently start with 1 land or 6, not rarely, not one night where I was cussing at my terible luck, I frequently as in over a dozen rounds a day have this happen. The weirder part is when I have 5-7 land in my starting hand, for three turns I draw land (then quit). And the opposite happens when I start with 1 or 2 land (I'll mulligan to five cards for a second guaranteed land) and I usually quit after three turns of not drawing land but instead my most expensive spells.

That's why I only play green and blue decks with cheap land grab and cheap ways to filter through cards. Calling it "rigged" implies the other player somehow controls it, that's ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥. It's just an error in the coding.

[Xenial Jesse]

Yes Peter hence the words rough example. I knew someone would geek out on the details eventually.

[conantheimp]

Originally posted by jmarsan2007:

There is something off about the shuffling and I never have this issue with paper magic.

I frequently start with 1 land or 6, not rarely, not one night where I was cussing at my terible luck, I frequently as in over a dozen rounds a day have this happen. The weirder part is when I have 5-7 land in my starting hand, for three turns I draw land (then quit). And the opposite happens when I start with 1 or 2 land (I'll mulligan to five cards for a second guaranteed land) and I usually quit after three turns of not drawing land but instead my most expensive spells.

That's why I only play green and blue decks with cheap land grab and cheap ways to filter through cards. Calling it "rigged" implies the other player somehow controls it, that's ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥. It's just an error in the coding.

There's no error in the coding, you're either just an outlier, or a human who is doing the perfectly natural thing of completing the pattern in your head. In my own years of play I've come across similar times when my own IRL deck fed me way too many or too few lands. It's not special, it's just statistics.

In XCOM 2 people are having the same issue that the RNG seems to hate you, but they don't realize that a 1/20 chance means a 1/20 chance to miss(95% accuracy with, like a sniper or something), not a "you're hitting this alien no matter what." Someone actually went and di the math, and found that the RNG was working perfectly fine. They repeated the same shot % over and over in different missions, and the result was that every % hit approximately how many times the prediction said it would. (It should be noted that on lower difficulties people report exactly the same problem, when in fact the RNG is actually weighted in the player's favor.)

So I'm betting if you recorded a hundred games across a hundred players, you'd find the distribution to be roughly what probability says it should be. If you actually find differently, then that would be a significant discovery and worth pointing out to the devs(I don't really know how good they are about solving bugs, so good luck with that I guess?).

tl;dr shut up until you have supporting evidence to substantiate your claims.

[zysron]

better than no land for seven turns in a ramp deck or heh 10 land in a row ...

but there are a couple of non green cards to help you get land(if you can make it to 3 mana)

[Torgan]

Today, with 26 lands deck, I had to mulligan 5-6 times bellow 6, 2-3 times on 4 because I did not got lands(or got 1). If you double ammount for draws because free mulligan, you will see that odds of getting those kind a draws, are not so probable... Sure it is still playable, but I think that is much more unprobable than it should be... Too many perfect hands, and too many unplayable ones.
By the way, why everyone talk about houndred or thousands of players, in 100 draws you should get screwed once for example, or at least in 1000 draws 10 times, no more, no matter what. Bad luck can't hit just certain players, with more games, and more players, you have good chance to not be hit by bad draws, but yet, every day you got few games like that.
If we assume that player avarage plays 15 games per day, that can be probably 30 draws per day, with free mulligans, and mulligans bellow 7(many time you would not mulligan). So Impossible hands like 7 lands, should happen every 3rd player once per day, but if that happens 3 times per day than it is much more than it should...
For example chance of getting more than one land in 26 lands deck is 0.986070637988568, so it means that in 1.4 games per 100 games you should got one, so that means that one player of 3 players should get it once per day, yet often I got it 2 time in row(with free mulligan), and in several games per day, and I should got it once in 3 days(if we assume that I'm the one of 3 players observed)... So it is obvious that RNG is not working as you state, even if you take in calculation number of players and games.

[peter.achde]

Originally posted by jmarsan2007:

That formula assumes the prior 7 cards are gone for some reason. You still start from a 60 card deck.

Yes, they are gone to your starting hand, so you can't draw them anymore. If you draw 7 lands into your starting hand: mulligan.

[conantheimp]

Originally posted by Torgan:

By the way, why everyone talk about houndred or thousands of players, in 100 draws you should get screwed once for example, or at least in 1000 draws 10 times, no more, no matter what. Bad luck can't hit just certain players, with more games, and more players, you have good chance to not be hit by bad draws, but yet, every day you got few games like that.

If we assume that player avarage plays 15 games per day, that can be probably 30 draws per day, with free mulligans, and mulligans bellow 7(many time you would not mulligan). So Impossible hands like 7 lands, should happen every 3rd player once per day, but if that happens 3 times per day than it is much more than it should...

For example chance of getting more than one land in 26 lands deck is 0.986070637988568, so it means that in 1.4 games per 100 games you should got one, so that means that one player of 3 players should get it once per day, yet often I got it 2 time in row(with free mulligan), and in several games per day, and I should got it once in 3 days(if we assume that I'm the one of 3 players observed)... So it is obvious that RNG is not working as you state, even if you take in calculation number of players and games.

The problem with your logic is that probability does not work that way. It is divided up across each player who ever plays in every game they ever have and ever will play. And even then, it will not guaranteed to evenly distribute unusually good or bad land amounts, nor to lump all of them on single players for the entirety of their career. The RNG doesn't remember that you just drew a land, or just drew two lands. All it ever knows is the probably of the next card, the next roll, the next turn of the wheel.

To draw a land for your first hand as your first card, it's a 20/60 chance. To draw another land as your second card, it is a 19/59 chance. It doesn't magically become a 380/3540 to draw your second card as a land because your first card was a land. 380/3540 is merely your chance, for this game over every game everyone ever has and will play(with a 20-40 deck), to draw two lands as their first cards for the game. Even if you've drawn 6 lands in a row, your chances of drawing another land are still 14/54, not the astronomical 390,700,800/1,946,482,876,800( or .02%) chance that you think it should be.

Likewise, the universe doesn't remember that you just got mana-flooded or mana-draught two times in a row. In fact, since you're not drawing from the depleted version of your deck after a mulligan, your chances of getting a bad number of lands is exactly the same.

[Firelord]

randomness is random - when chance for event A to happen is 1 in 1000 it may happen 10 times in a row(probability for it is exactly 10 to the power -30), or it may not happen at all, probability are not statistics.

[yummyvermin]

Originally posted by Deef:

For a rough example lets assume you have 24 lands in a 60-card deck and are drawing from nothing. The odds of pulling 7 lands in a row are 24/60 * 23/59 * 22/58 * 21/57 * 20/56 * 19/55 * 18/54.

Which is 9 times in 10000, or just under 1 in 1000.

The problem with your calculation is that no one really starts counting until they draw a land. so really we should calculate the odds of drawing 6 lands because the first one is assumed.