All rares are equally likely.

[Ringel]

I don't know why you all keep ignoring my posts.

[red]ALL RARES OCCUR WITH THE SAME PROBABILITY NOW!!![/red]

It used to be, because of the order in which cards were picked (common, then uncommon then rare), templar order rares and assassin crime rares were rarer than other rares.

The devs were made aware of the problem, stated they would change the order in which cards were picked and did so. Cards are now picked rare, uncommon, then common.

So now, unless the devs have lied to us or made some other mistake, all rares of the same faction are equally likely to be chosen in their respective packs.

[Tuism]

I don't understand exactly how changing the order of cards being picked alone would change the likelihood of order Templar cards appearing in Templar packs or crime assassin cards appearing in assassin packs

But I don't think they lied to us (harsh term to use, I think it would have been miscommunicated or misunderstood if anything) or anything,

I think the rarity is as evenly spread as it should be

[IchiRomero]

I cant see this change in the app description
Anyway is a bit stupid, cause the sistem picks a ramdom rare, and not depends of the previous common or uncomon cards... If it is true that the developers did that, they have a big problem focusing

[Tuism]

May 26, 2012 3:12:28 GMT -5 IchiRomero said:

I cant see this change in the app description
Anyway is a bit stupid, cause the sistem picks a ramdom rare, and not depends of the previous common or uncomon cards... If it is true that the developers did that, they have a big problem focusing

Not sure what you mean...

[Ringel]

The reason that blue templar rares and black assassin rares were rarer was this:

The algorithm that chooses cards will not allow more than 4 of the same color in one pack. In the old method if you picked 4 red commons, you would see no red uncommons or red rares.

Now the reason why this skewed the numbers (but not in mixed packs) is this: Consider Templar packs. There are more blue templar cards of all rarities than any other color. That meant you were much more likely to open 4 blue cards before you open the rare card, thus reducing the chance of ever seeing a blue rare.

Reversing the order of the cards means you open the rare first, followed by uncommons, so you can't run into 4 blue cards before you pick the rares and uncommons.

Now rares and uncommons are equally likely across all colors. Commons may run into a slight skewed distribution, but they are common, so who cares?

[dannyshan]

May 26, 2012 12:07:53 GMT -5 Ringel said:

The reason that blue templar rares and black assassin rares were rarer was this:

The algorithm that chooses cards will not allow more than 4 of the same color in one pack. In the old method if you picked 4 red commons, you would see no red uncommons or red rares.

Now the reason why this skewed the numbers (but not in mixed packs) is this: Consider Templar packs. There are more blue templar cards of all rarities than any other color. That meant you were much more likely to open 4 blue cards before you open the rare card, thus reducing the chance of ever seeing a blue rare.

Reversing the order of the cards means you open the rare first, followed by uncommons, so you can't run into 4 blue cards before you pick the rares and uncommons.

Now rares and uncommons are equally likely across all colors. Commons may run into a slight skewed distribution, but they are common, so who cares?

That makes sense

[Pete]

This is gods work...

[gamemaestro]

Ringel, thanks for the nice description. I've followed this conversation for months without knowing that tidbit about the algorithm and it never made sense. Now it does.

[Tuism]

Ahhh that makes sense, but does that also mean now that since all rares are equally likely, you're much more likely to open order cards than anything else due to there being SO many more order cards than anything else?

[Ringel]

Yes, in Templar packs, that is right. Although packs are limited to 4 of each color, so you will see other colors in your packs too.

[Tuism]

Makes sense I missed the 4 per colour max thing somewhere along the line. It's all good as it is now, I think so, at least.

[coolkendude]

Just read this post - thanks for the great explanation! I never knew that they imposed a max of 4 cards of the same color; I always thought they'd just do a random draw of a card for commons, uncommons and rares (and include a rule that you can't pick the same card in one pack).

[azreal]

I've actually gotten 2 of the same common in a pack so I'm not sure that is a rule. Only happened once though.

[Tuism]

2 of the same commons doesn't go against the rule of there not being more than 4 of the same colour in a pack...

[Ringel]

I hadn't realized it, but I've never seen duplicate cards in a pack either. I suspect it is a rule too.