Angry Grimace
Two cannibals are eating a clown. One turns to the other and says "does something taste funny to you?"
I hope they Print Jester's Cap in the next Core Set again so I can remove all the Whips from God's Beard's deck.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Magic: The Gathering |OT3| Enchantment Under the Siege
- Thread starter The Technomancer
- Start date
- Status
Lazy vs Crazy
Member
I need a ton of sleeves, any suggestions on decent ones that aren't absurd expensive?
Dragon shields shuffle best but get dirty easily, KMC Super Mattes are overall the best imo. Ultra Pros are total garbage, especially the picture sleeves.
potomacdist.com has the best deals on bulk sleeves, if you need 15+ packs.
I've had zero issues with my Dragon Shields. I use them all the time on all my decks. Never used the KMCs but they're probably good if Lucario is recommending them.
Also, yes, the picture-backed Ultra Pros are absolute trash. They fall apart really easily and, this is anecdotal but, they seem to warp my cards.
Also, yes, the picture-backed Ultra Pros are absolute trash. They fall apart really easily and, this is anecdotal but, they seem to warp my cards.
Angry Grimace
Two cannibals are eating a clown. One turns to the other and says "does something taste funny to you?"
I use KMC Super Matters and Perfect Fits to double-sleeve (I drink a lot, so I need more protection for my cards from myself).
divisionbyzorro
Member
I bought a 50-pack of Ultra Pro Matte White sleeves at the Theros prerelease. I used them for weekly drafts and didn't retire them until after the end of drafting M15. Maybe the picture ones are worse, but the basic Matte color sleeves seemed pretty durable. They never broke (although they were pretty dirty, and I did actually clean them a couple of times).
I sleeved my cube and EDH decks in Dragon Shield blacks. They smudge like nobody's business, but they are sturdy.
I've considered double sleeving, and I probably should, to be honest. Just haven't gotten around to it.
I sleeved my cube and EDH decks in Dragon Shield blacks. They smudge like nobody's business, but they are sturdy.
I've considered double sleeving, and I probably should, to be honest. Just haven't gotten around to it.
divisionbyzorro
Member
I'm still 3 hours behind on the coverage. Are the coverage guys complaining about it? Or are the viewers/chat?
Angry Grimace
Two cannibals are eating a clown. One turns to the other and says "does something taste funny to you?"
Wizards running Worlds on Tuesday is just brilliant.
There's always a smartass at FNM who will bitch about it despite it doing nothing TO them and protecting a deck of cardboard worth $600 (this is how much my Abzan Standard deck was when I sleeved it up).
There's always a smartass at FNM who will bitch about it despite it doing nothing TO them and protecting a deck of cardboard worth $600 (this is how much my Abzan Standard deck was when I sleeved it up).
Not as bad as GL for not revealing morphs/Ari Lax
SigmasonicX
Member
The story of Anafenza, and with that, every khan has had a story centered on him or her.
What happened?
divisionbyzorro
Member
Did something else happen? I heard that he spilled water on his Modern deck yesterday. I didn't hear how that one turned out (other than the fact that he actually did play some Modern).
Lazy vs Crazy
Member
Thanks for the help.
Sounds like he ended up playing with proxies per Owen's twitter.
divisionbyzorro
Member
Owen seems kinda salty about that and the entire tournament as well.
Curious what the other proxy was. Head Judges are generally given latitude to allow proxies for cards which get damaged during the tournament, so I'm not surprised that Cifka ended up going that route.
The Matte sleeves are OK in my experience.
divisionbyzorro
Member
More fuel for those with conspiracy theories about the MTGO shuffler:
http://www.reddit.com/r/magicTCG/comments/2o73b4/incontrovertible_fact_of_the_unfairness_of_the/
This will go well.
http://www.reddit.com/r/magicTCG/comments/2o73b4/incontrovertible_fact_of_the_unfairness_of_the/
This will go well.
divisionbyzorro
Member
Shuffling is handled server-side, and obviously we don't have access to the executables/libraries that run on the server, so we kind of have to trust his code.
But if true, it might explain why when things go bad, they go really bad on MTGO. I've always completely refused to listen to people complain about the shuffler because it has always just seemed like looking for excuses. There hasn't been any evidence to support anything else until now.
There is no way that Wizards acknowledges any mistakes though. If they did, they would have to accept a ridiculous amount of responsibility, possibly even a lawsuit.
But if true, it might explain why when things go bad, they go really bad on MTGO. I've always completely refused to listen to people complain about the shuffler because it has always just seemed like looking for excuses. There hasn't been any evidence to support anything else until now.
There is no way that Wizards acknowledges any mistakes though. If they did, they would have to accept a ridiculous amount of responsibility, possibly even a lawsuit.
"God's Beard!"
Member
*shrugs*
divisionbyzorro
Member
This is a better explanation of what's supposedly wrong:
http://datagenetics.com/blog/november42014/index.html
In short: all possible orderings of your deck should be equally likely when you shuffle. If this algorithm is in fact being used, then that's not true.
Where it "matters" is in mulligans. It means that when you mulligan, certain hands are statistically more likely to appear than others - like the hand that you mulliganed away. Depending upon how the deck is ordered initially, it's possible that the algorithm is more likely to continually manascrew/flood you than it should.
I don't think it's likely to matter that much, to be honest. But it's critical that the games are fair, and this isn't "fair."
First time I had both Spectral Procession and Lingering Souls in the same deck and, man, you're pretty much screwed unless you have a board sweeper. Also passed both Armageddons because they're bad cards.
It's really not that big of a deal. Things can go bad by hand shuffling too. It's the nature of randomizing. I wouldn't be surprised if the code isn't optimized though. Think about it like this. Casinos use shuffling machines that likely use some kind of predictable algorithm and people just accept this when there's a shitload of money on the line.
It's really not that big of a deal. Things can go bad by hand shuffling too. It's the nature of randomizing. I wouldn't be surprised if the code isn't optimized though. Think about it like this. Casinos use shuffling machines that likely use some kind of predictable algorithm and people just accept this when there's a shitload of money on the line.
divisionbyzorro
Member
I don't disagree that the odds of it actually affecting a game are small. But if they're doing it this way, it's wrong, and it should be fixed.
I think there's a lot of legal hullabaloo surrounding their house-advantage practices.
Wizards does not have the same kind of protection, and they particularly do not want to be compared to casinos because it opens up all kinds of problems regarding digital property.
Same reason why MMOs cover their asses with a 10 page EULA saying you do not own anything on their servers, you simply pay for the privilege of accessing them.
blindrocket
Member
Could anyone post the decklist for me? I lack Premium.
http://www.starcitygames.com/article/29848_Video-Jeskai-Geist-In-Modern.html
http://www.starcitygames.com/article/29848_Video-Jeskai-Geist-In-Modern.html
Angry Grimace
Two cannibals are eating a clown. One turns to the other and says "does something taste funny to you?"
You hand shuffling isn't random, that's why you hate real random distribution.
"God's Beard!"
Member
There's a dude at my LGS that spreads out his entire deck and reassembles it face down with a random number generator on his laptop. People get weird about shuffles.
keeblerdrow
Member
[QUOTE="God's Beard!";141556369]There's a dude at my LGS that spreads out his entire deck and reassembles it face down with a random number generator on his laptop. People get weird about shuffles.[/QUOTE]
And then he presents for cut. COMPLETELY UNDOES HIS WORK.
And then he presents for cut. COMPLETELY UNDOES HIS WORK.
The Technomancer
card-carrying scientician
Yeah, this always kind of struck me. While bridge shuffling might technically be random because a few cards will double up so that its not perfect alternate threading, its still not like you're putting your deck through a true RNG
charlequin
Banned
Read Worth Wollpert's comment on the reddit post. He goes into some extensive detail about the algorithm used for the server-side shuffling. There are a ton of terrible, terrible things about MTGO, but this really doesn't appear to be one of them.
PaulExcellent
Member
So my friend has his collection out and I'm noticing that some of the cards he has, which are crazy old, are way stronger than the ones that we got from the deck packages we bought. Is that a thing?
Also, they look crazy neat.
Also, they look crazy neat.
The Technomancer
card-carrying scientician
Yeah they didn't really have a grasp on power level back then. It goes both ways too. Some old sets are filled with bonkers powerful cards (Urza's block, the original Alpha set) and some sets are basically entirely trash with barely a single playable card in them (Homelands, Mirage)
PaulExcellent
Member
I see. But for causal games with friends, they're fine to use, right?
The Technomancer
card-carrying scientician
Oh yeah, just play whatever you want with your friends. Which cards in particular are you seeing?
They've got things at a pretty good balance now. On the one hand one might argue its a bit more boring but on the other hand there have been repeated fuckups in the past where the game was actually harmed because an overpowered deck was ruining the metagame. Back in like 2004 they had to ban something like eight cards at once because a deck was so oppressive that people were just stopping playing.
The Technomancer
card-carrying scientician
Seriously there was a set with a "sacrifice your lands" subtheme:
That whole block was kind of an overreaction to the Urza block. From what I recall, the higher-ups basically said, if another overpowered block like Urza were to happen and drive more players away from the game, R&D was going to be flushed and restaffed. So they erred on the side of underpowered to keep their jobs.Seriously there was a set with a "sacrifice your lands" subtheme:
narcosis219
Member
Pretty much this. They're the ones who think 12345, 11111, 22222, 54321 aren't a random numbers.
Can't really blame them; that's just the way humans are. We're wired to recognize patterns and confirmation bias just creates a positive feedback loop.
GoutPatrol
Forgotten in his cell
I have no idea what extra stuff that could be, but I'm guessing its just UR Delver with Geist, Path, and Lightning Helix. You can mix and match any of those.
"God's Beard!"
Member
My newest masterpiece:
4C Trampling Dredge
Creatures(21):
Sidebar(15):
C'mon, they were fumbling in the dark! Trial and error! It's not like they're just making nonsense mechanics over and ov...
oh god no
4C Trampling Dredge
Creatures(21):
- 4x Satyr Wayfinder
- 4x Hooting Mandrills
- 4x Siege Rhino
- 3x Sidisi, Brood Tyrant
- 3x Sagu Mauler
- 3x Soul of Theros
- 4xCommune with the Gods
- 4x Become Immense
- 3x Sultai Charm
- 3x Whip of Erebos
- 4x Sandsteppe Citadel
- 4x Opulent Palace
- 3x Windswept Heath
- 3x Polluted Delta
- 2x Forest
- 2x Swamp
- 2x Island
- 2x Plains
- 1x Urborg, Tomb of Yawgmoth
- 2x Mana Confluence
Sidebar(15):
- 4x Drown in Sorrow
- 4x Thoughtseize
- 3x Kiora, the Crashing Wave
- 3x Nissa, Worldwaker
- 1x Spear of Heliod
Seriously there was a set with a "sacrifice your lands" subtheme:
C'mon, they were fumbling in the dark! Trial and error! It's not like they're just making nonsense mechanics over and ov...
oh god no
charlequin
Banned
Prophecy is the worst Magic set by a pretty decent margin.
[QUOTE="God's Beard!";141561790],
C'mon, they were fumbling in the dark! Trial and error! It's not like they're just making nonsense mechanics over and ov...
oh god no[/QUOTE]
Adarkar Unicorn is easily a top five "amazing art on garbage card" for me.
divisionbyzorro
Member
I saw that. I can't help but still be slightly concerned.
1) Why is there "bad" shuffling code in the system in the first place? This kind of thing should be in a helper library that you share between server and client code - it's completely reasonable to believe that if MTGO.exe on my machine has bad shuffling code, so does the server.
1a) Corollary - there's no reason to believe (based on prior history) that the WotC coders follow any sort of best practices, so it would be entirely possible that there is all sorts of vestigial code lying around that doesn't actually do anything.
2) If the shuffler was broken, WotC would never admit it and would absolutely vehemently deny it.
2a) That's exactly what a conspiratard would say. It doesn't mean anything one way or another.
The way I see it, nothing's been proven or disproven. But nothing but good can come out of this. If the code was bad, WotC will quietly fix it while denying it was ever broken. If the code was good, then great - no harm done other than a little bit of Reddit drama. Either way, I'm going to keep playing MTGO.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked