Check out our Event Calendar! View birthdays, holidays and upcoming tournaments!
In case anyone was wondering how the distributions went....I could not complete 2 sets with four boxes (missing Sons of Thunder and His Name is John)in 96 packs (384 cards)Highest Frequency: Negate All LS and Marketplace (7 of each pulled in 96 packs)Distributions:1-30: 99 cards31-60: 105 cards61-90: 77 cards91-115: 97 cardsMaybe I had bad luck but when I get nearly double what I would expect for even distribution I get concerned...
I am sooo happy with the distribution for this set. I hated how TexP was set up so that all the packs were the same. I'd rather pull 5 of one card in a box than have that happen again. It opens up more trading.
Quote from: redemptioncousin on August 31, 2010, 09:36:12 AMI am sooo happy with the distribution for this set. I hated how TexP was set up so that all the packs were the same. I'd rather pull 5 of one card in a box than have that happen again. It opens up more trading.i agree about TexP. all of the cards were packaged in the same way of having Burial Shroud and Guardian always together and the TexP cards paired with the same ones every time. I think we need another set with at least 200 cards where all of the cards in the pack are from that set and we packs instead of tins and boxes.
Quote from: KoalaKingofFortressAlstad on August 31, 2010, 09:52:18 AMQuote from: redemptioncousin on August 31, 2010, 09:36:12 AMI am sooo happy with the distribution for this set. I hated how TexP was set up so that all the packs were the same. I'd rather pull 5 of one card in a box than have that happen again. It opens up more trading.i agree about TexP. all of the cards were packaged in the same way of having Burial Shroud and Guardian always together and the TexP cards paired with the same ones every time. I think we need another set with at least 200 cards where all of the cards in the pack are from that set and we packs instead of tins and boxes. since you can't send in barcodes from tins and boxes......
I'm glad, that in quite possibly the best set since warriors, we've found something we don't like to complain about.
Quote from: Red Dragon Thorn on August 31, 2010, 10:07:11 AMI'm glad, that in quite possibly the best set since warriors, we've found something we don't like to complain about.Not complaining, so to speak, just going with statistical distribution. One would think that in 400 cards where 115 is a complete set, that you should have 2 sets...I mostly posted this to see whether or not a rarity of distribution has occurred or if its just an anomaly...cause I'm a weird stat geek like that...
Honestly, you really can't apply real stats to card distribution. The number of cards created simply isn't large enough for true randomness to take effect. But think of it this way:If we really had a true random sample where taking a card out of the stash would not change the probability of getting it again there would on the order of 2.64 X 10^86 ways to distribute two boxes of cards (this is including those ridiculous cases in which every card you get is the same). The number of ways to get a complete set in those two boxes is 5 X 10^54. Basically it would be close to impossible (statistically speaking) to get a complete set in two boxes.
