PDA

View Full Version : Emulating a physical card disibution foolish?



shocker455
08-26-2013, 03:31 AM
I consistently see people bring up the point that hex will emulate how packs hard made in real life. (because Cory said this of course). Am i missing something or is the idea of emulating it completely pointless?

Simply put, how packs are made physically is cards are printed on large sheets, cut out, then "randomized" by a computer in a factory with some algorithm into packs. The whole goal of the system is to make a pack of seemingly random cards. Wouldn't the simplest/best way of doing this digitally randomly generate a rare, X uncommons, and Y commons? Sure you could add stuff to make sure there was the same amount of every rare released, but probability would take care of it for you for the most part.

In the end it would seem the physical tcg are trying to copy what a digital tcg could do easily, not the other way around...

Kroan
08-26-2013, 03:35 AM
I'm not sure why this wasn't posted in the other topic, but the idea that printsheets are done to try to do random packs is wrong.

The content of packs is carefully balanced to accommodate limited play. Certain commons and uncommons are placed in the same pack.

Facilier
08-26-2013, 03:36 AM
What he talks about is print runs where each pack doesn't just generate its own rare individually, which is very relevant for limited events, such as sealed deck tournaments and drafts, where the print run ensures a diversity of rares, instead of potentially every pack having the same one, or on a less abstract level, getting a draft massively dominated by rares of 1-2 colours.

Gen91
08-26-2013, 03:40 AM
When every pack is 100% rnd you could have really, really bad luck and get the exactly same pack 5 times in a row.
In a real tcg this is impossible (I think).
That's why to copy a real system is better, when I am not totally mistaken.

keldrin
08-26-2013, 03:44 AM
Also, by having "print runs" you avoid some rare or legendary card, being even rarer than it was meant to be, by random luck preventing it from coming up as often as it should. Or, flip side, being more common than intended. This way, no matter what, the ratio of cards will be set.

Malicus
08-26-2013, 04:16 AM
When every pack is 100% rnd you could have really, really bad luck and get the exactly same pack 5 times in a row.
In a real tcg this is impossible (I think).
That's why to copy a real system is better, when I am not totally mistaken.

The permutations are finite so it would depend on the print volume, also remember that a tournament doesn't necessarily have a single source of the boosters unless it is strictly buy in which Hex tournaments are not set up to be from what we have been told so far. Scarcity is important so simulating print runs to generate the initial card pool is necessary to ensure scarcity is uniform, once we get beyond this point the distribution of the cards themselves can be far more flexible.

Kroan
08-26-2013, 04:21 AM
The permutations are finite so it would depend on the print volume, also remember that a tournament doesn't necessarily have a single source of the boosters unless it is strictly buy in which Hex tournaments are not set up to be from what we have been told so far. Scarcity is important so simulating print runs to generate the initial card pool is necessary to ensure scarcity is uniform, once we get beyond this point the distribution of the cards themselves can be far more flexible. Packs in a tournament are opened at the same time and therefor have the same source. It doesn't matter whether you already had the packs or got them from paying entry fee

Patrigan
08-26-2013, 04:33 AM
Packs in a tournament are opened at the same time and therefor have the same source. It doesn't matter whether you already had the packs or got them from paying entry fee

I disagree with this point. I've seen players with 3 times the same rare in a sealed pool of 6 boosters. Print runs do NOTHING for tournaments. Even less so in Hex, when the boosters you open might be opened at the same time 100s of other guys so you can't ensure that they have 6 boosters following eachother (and in fact, you should discourage that, otherwise things might become predictable)

The primary thing they do is making sure that at the end of a print run all cards have a certain rarity and no freak accidents have happened. Even running the best randomizer 100000 times there is a really tiny chance that every pack would contain the exact same rare. A print run prevents that.

Kroan
08-26-2013, 04:38 AM
I disagree with this point. I've seen players with 3 times the same rare in a sealed pool of 6 boosters. Print runs do NOTHING for tournaments. Even less so in Hex, when the boosters you open might be opened at the same time 100s of other guys so you can't ensure that they have 6 boosters following eachother (and in fact, you should discourage that, otherwise things might become predictable)
If you mean MTGO, then having the same rare three times is possible, depending on the size of the tournament. As all boosters are opened at the same time, they are then distributed amongst players. That means with 16 players (a release sealed queue) it's 16*6 boosters. 96 boosters. In a small set it's a fair chance this will happen and therefor only strengthen my point instead ;)

This also happens in real life by the way. Just recently someone opened up three Tarmagoyf's at a Modern Masters Tournament. Obviously he dropped out before deckswap.

ossuary
08-26-2013, 04:50 AM
I don't blame him!

"Congratulations! You move on to the next round."

"Nah, I'm good. Later, losers!"

Xenavire
08-26-2013, 05:02 AM
We should review the facts we have.

Fact one: People can bring in boosters that were received in any manner, or buy on entry. This leads to a question - will the contents be determined when opened or when bought/recieved? The only way it would be even close to useful in limited is if they are determined when opened, and we have no information to confirm it or deny it (although we have heard that treasure/loot chests will be determined when opened, so if that logic follows to the cards too, we have an idea of what to expect.)

The second fact: there will be a period of time between boosters being opened. This is unavoidable, but may be a non-issue. If draft tournaments are instanced, then the boosters can all be generated at the time the tournament is created and instanced, rather than the time they are opened. However, if the booster contents are not generated at the same time, you may very well end up with a completely random set of boosters.

Third fact: Real life tournaments have the same issues, as mentioned above. There is also the slim chance of faulty print runs giving strange pack combintations etc. I doubt Hex will have faulty runs, but in strange circumstances there might be bugs or errors that make all packs duplicates of each other etc. Hopefully this will be a non-issue.

Fourth fact: RNG would remove all chance of people trying to game the system by trying to figure out the chances of other cards appearing. I only see this being a problem if CZE allows add-ons freely like WoW does, but RNG would remove the risk regardless.

So limited print runs, if done the right way, would work out perfectly and leave us with balanced drafting and sealed. But RNG could have an interesting effect on how we drafted and played. It is fairly interesting to think about, and I am ready to hear what CZE have done with it.

blakegrandon
08-26-2013, 06:01 AM
Fourth fact: RNG would remove all chance of people trying to game the system by trying to figure out the chances of other cards appearing. I only see this being a problem if CZE allows add-ons freely like WoW does, but RNG would remove the risk regardless.


Fifth Fact: I would rather eat lead paint chips than open boosters and have to deal with RNG. It would pretty much destroy any fun involved in opening boosters and getting "random" cards, because real randomization is not very fun for people.

Real randomization+small sample size=terrible experience where you end up getting tons of the same card because RNG is pure evil.

Xenavire
08-26-2013, 06:24 AM
On the flip side, it could work out well for you. And it would promote trading.

As of now we have no idea if we can buy boxes/cases of boosters anyway, so you might end up fairly screwed like that anyway.

Shadowelf
08-26-2013, 08:21 AM
This is how Cory explained it http://www.twitch.tv/weekingeek/b/413067790 check 33:10-35:09

Also i wouldn't worry that much over it; they have said multiple times that they see themselves as a tcg company, so i would trust that they have what needed to provide that we are getting a good mix of cards in boosters, and that card generation isn't RNG dependant

HyenaNipples
08-26-2013, 08:29 AM
I think most are forgetting that emulating the physical distribution system is something that allows Hex TCG to keep it's identity as a TCG. The reason why I'm here is that Hex is something new, but it resembles enough of what I know that I'm comfortable. It's essentially crafted itself as: what I already like but more. Changing the distribution system would alter that.

Vorpal
08-26-2013, 08:59 AM
Simply put, how packs are made physically is cards are printed on large sheets, cut out, then "randomized" by a computer in a factory with some algorithm into packs. The whole goal of the system is to make a pack of seemingly random cards. Wouldn't the simplest/best way of doing this digitally randomly generate a rare, X uncommons, and Y commons? Sure you could add stuff to make sure there was the same amount of every rare released, but probability would take care of it for you for the most part.

I don't see any difference in the two methods you are describing. All that the sheets of cards do is ensure there is the same amount of every rarity of card released. Then they are randomly shuffled together.

You are saying "no no, just randomly shuffle them together! Oh and make sure there is the same amount of each card".

Facilier
08-26-2013, 06:32 PM
The print run system also avoids opening the same uncommon thrice in the same pack, improving the skill for reading signals in limited, and generally providing a less random drafting experience.

Mokog
08-26-2013, 06:50 PM
Don't make things complicated. Print runs are a familiar system for CZE and players. We do not need to over engineer the prosses when it is native to the genre and remains functional.

Gorgol
08-27-2013, 10:42 AM
rng, no thanks. I won't be buying any packs if its a RNG system. I'd prefer printruns for most of the reasons already listed in this thread.