|
Post by jefmajor on Mar 25, 2012 16:54:30 GMT -5
I haven't played this game for a couple of days, but I finally decided to test it out. I ran the experiment in story mode 6 times with my Highlander deck. I never drew the same card twice. The chance of drawing at least one of the same cards in one test is 55.58%. Most of the time you should see at least one of the same card. If it is pure reshuffle, redraw, the chance of it never happening 6 times in a row is (1 - 0.5558)^6 = 0.0077. So less than 1%. I'm convinced. If anyone wants to try it 12 times, go for it. Alright that does explain a lot. Thank you very much for putting the time in to it. I DO feel like that has a lot to do with strategy: Not deck building, per say, but strategy, definitely. I had a feeling that either that was the case or I was just insanely unlucky with my hands. Goes to show; don't redo a hand of pure boosters! You'll regret it!
|
|
|
Post by thedude808 on Mar 25, 2012 20:25:16 GMT -5
Ringel's results are definitely good to know. It probably makes this TCG just like every other TCG I've played that allows mulligans. If you dump your opening hand it goes to the bottom of your deck and you draw another hand. We don't know that your first hand goes to the bottom of your deck, but I think it's a logical hypothesis since you can't mulligan into your original hand.
|
|
|
Post by madstryfe on Mar 25, 2012 23:16:18 GMT -5
Does anyone else appreciate Ringel's calculation as much as I do? Thank you very much for answering so many of our probablity and calculation questions! You must kill at texas hold'em
|
|
|
Post by thedude808 on Mar 25, 2012 23:44:49 GMT -5
Yes, I definitely appreciate his stat-crunching and analysis.
|
|
|
Post by Pete on Mar 26, 2012 0:39:23 GMT -5
Yeah. Perfect to know this.
|
|
|
Post by Tuism on Mar 26, 2012 2:34:33 GMT -5
Yeah man, it's awesome to have a bona fide statistician here giving us REAL numbers instead of human-judgement surety trap we all fall into Have I apologised for being so harsh the ultra-rare thing yet Ringel? I apologise So the statistical lesson here is to NEVER mulligan out of 6 income boosters in your hand? What're the chances of getting at least 2 income boosters in your mulligan if you mulligan away 6, assuming you have 20 in your deck?
|
|
eev
New Member
Posts: 42
|
Post by eev on Mar 26, 2012 5:18:10 GMT -5
i played ug deck and i have only one copy of zero mana draw spell, in one game it was in the opening hand and after pressing change button it was there again. so it seems like you can get the same card after mulligan or maybe it is just a glitch kind of.
|
|
|
Post by thest4lker on Mar 26, 2012 8:39:55 GMT -5
Ok, any chance of another major test/number crunch?
The question becomes this: if you mulligan, and you can't get the exact same cards again (sorry eev, at this point I'm going on the assumption ringel's tests were right, and your's was a bug/fluke...) do those cards go to the bottom of the deck (i.e. you are not going to get them unless you play out your full deck), or is it re-draw then re-shuffle? Imagine you mulligan a discard deck with juno as the winner, and juno ends up right at the bottom. Depending wether you have more than one, could be a looooong game...
|
|
|
Post by thedude808 on Mar 26, 2012 14:26:57 GMT -5
Alright, here's the deal. I built a Highlander deck and tested a couple of things. First, I tested whether or not you can draw a card from your initial hand after you mulligan. Yes, I know Ringel already did this, but I figured a test to corroborate his results wouldn't hurt. I mulliganned my opening hand 17 times. Not once did I draw a card I had mulliganned away. I fully expected these results as they fall in line with Ringel's.
I also found out why you can't immediately draw a card you mulligan away. As I hypothesized earlier in this thread, your original starting hand goes to the bottom of your deck after you mulligan, and those six cards are arranged in a specific manner. After you draw your initial six cards, the game rearranges them on the screen from left to right by how much gold they cost to play. That is the order they will be on the bottom of your deck. The card on the far right will be on the very bottom, the card second from the right will be second from the bottom, and so on with the card on the far left being sixth from the bottom of the deck. I played a game in story mode where I didn't try to win. I only tried to work completely through my deck without tutoring. I did it twice and got the same results each time.
Obviously, if you or your opponent ever search your deck, it will then be randomized.
This can be useful if you use Benevolent Midwife or Sacred Vision. You already know what cards are on the bottom of your deck if you mulliganned so you know whether or not you want to move them to the top of your deck.
|
|
|
Post by Ringel on Mar 26, 2012 14:28:15 GMT -5
Yah, my last post made no sense, so I deleted it. Good job thedude!
|
|
|
Post by Tuism on Mar 26, 2012 14:46:30 GMT -5
Thanks for doing the test! Thought it would be a bit of a mission to do! This is indeed good info, now we know to simply not expect those cards from the first hand ever again unless ur emptying your deck
|
|
|
Post by thedude808 on Mar 26, 2012 14:56:44 GMT -5
now we know to simply not expect those cards from the first hand ever again unless ur emptying your deck Yes, and no. By Order of the King, Discreet Calling, Family Heirloom, Scientific Method, Quick Study, Pick Your Poison. Any one of these cards concludes with your sequence being randomized (yes, there are others, too). So yes, don't expect to see those initial six cards again unless you use some form of tutor or you draw your deck.
|
|
|
Post by Tuism on Mar 26, 2012 15:02:07 GMT -5
Yes I was gonna add unless you tutor and shuffle forgot to
|
|
|
Post by thest4lker on Mar 26, 2012 15:11:45 GMT -5
Wow, thanks thedude, awesome work (and of course ringel)
|
|
mana
Full Member
Posts: 367
|
Post by mana on Mar 26, 2012 15:53:57 GMT -5
okay it always felt like it is that way but gj confirming it. i didnt think it to be that way
|
|