-
- knto
- Registered User
-
Member for 11 years, 7 months, and 20 days
Last active Sun, Nov, 6 2022 21:21:28
- 1 Follower
- 1,227 Total Posts
- 263 Thanks
-
Oct 2, 2015
knto posted a message on The Magic Street Journal: Wizards Always Hurts The Ones They LoveWhile I agree with most of the article, specifically the part about speculation, I think you were a bit off the mark on pucatrade. Obviously it is a business that is intended to make money, but from what I have seen they do so by providing a service. The value of pucapoints is held relatively constant despite new users joining. The reason they offer rewards for inviting is 2 fold: 1 it brings in new players which not only means more people to potentially spend money but also a larger trading pool for all of the users, and 2 It allows for the introduction of more points into the system which is vital to keep it from failing as a micro economy (if there aren't enough points no one can afford cards and so no trading happens. This is a direct result of the price controlling but it is preferable in my mind than opening the market up to speculation). The point that "Pucatrade claims that pucapoints 'are not a virtual currency'" but that it is in fact one is much more accurate. I suspect it mas more to do with the legal implication of a currency than actively deceiving the user base. I regularly trade online and pucatrade has worked out fine for me. If you are looking for rare cards then you're going to have trouble finding them just like a regular trade system, but pucapoints make it a little easier since you don't have to have cards off their wants list. I have used the service to get rid of cards I wasn't using and to get cards that I wanted or needed plenty of times and am satisfied with the service but it is slower than a store and it takes forever to get someone to send you older cards. You can argue that it is run poorly and you could even argue that the service actually hurts the users instead of heloing them but comparing it to bit coin or saying it is a ponzi scheme is just wrong. The only people I know who are even dissatisfied with the service are people who had ridiculous expectation or who felt that trading moderators handled situations badly.Posted in: Articles - To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
This card cost too much for a low curve sligh deck. It won't make the cut in eternal formats where the difference between 1 and two mana is the difference between goblin guide and tarmagoyf. In standard paying 1 mana for instant speed is fine, but os there really a deck that will consistently have creatures to sac and want to sac them? I don't see 4 damage being so much better than 3 mana that I'm willing to jump through some hoops.
Finally don't run bad cards to make other bad cards good. There are a few exceptions to this, but not many.
to guarantee a win you will need no more than 2 non-Persistent Petitioners. If you want to calculate the chance of it whiffing. That would be a finite percolation problem which you would probably just estimate from simulating it a couple hundred times
something like
import numpy as np
hitsindeck=20
decksize=40
dudes_in_hand=2
while dudes_in_hand>=2 and decksize>0:
dudes_in_hand+=-2
for i in range(4):
if np.random()>hitsindeck/decksize:
hitsindeck+=-1
dudes_in_hand+=1
decksize+=-1
if decksize<=0:
print("You did it!")
else:
print("You dun goofed!")
except you would run that a few hundred times and keep tallies instead of printing witty remarks. (ps I wrote it in python because I hate semicolons)
edit: typo. also imagine there are tabs for my loops