Elite Pack #4 - Masterpiece Collection

2»

Comments

  • shteev
    shteev Posts: 2,031 Chairperson of the Boards
    THEMAGICkMAN said:
    ZW2007- said:
    shteev said:
    The only thing about the 'not planning to purchase' option is that the %s for each card no longer add up to 100%.
    I enjoy that the new forum has made polls worse in general, progress! Before, it would show me how many people voted for an option in addition to what % that was. Now I have to math and I don't want to have to...but I did.
    Total votes: 53
    Noxious Gearhulk: 3% (3% of 53 = 1.59)
    Torrential Gearhulk: 1% (1% of 53 = .53)
    Not planning...: 88% (88% of 53 = 46.64)
    Would if...: 5% (5% of 53 = 2.65)
    Round them all up and we get our total votes. 3 voters actually opened the packs, 67% received Noxious Gearhulk and 33% received Torrential Gearhulk. Hats off to you brave souls for purchasing such a horrendous pack. Hey, there's a card idea. Horrendous Gearhulk. It could be a colorless 6/6 construct creature with can't attack and can't block that costs 25 mana.  Seems about as playable as some of the others.

    Horrendous Gearhulk should be a masterpiece. For "collections" yknow. 
    I'd like to say something about Horrendous Gearhulk, but I'm not sure if my post would count as being Off Topic.

    Back to the topic of Elite Packs, tho...

    [quote="App store page"]What's New in Version 1.10.2.15075 MTGPQ 1.10.2!
    New Masterpiece Cards - Rare and very powerful high end cards to add to your collection
    Mana Jewels Currency - New earnable currency used for high level card packs
    New Special Packs - With high chances at Rares, Mythics and Masterpiece cards[/quote]

    Is there some legal requirement to how high a 'high chance' must be? Or can a 'high chance' refer to literally anything? Is 0.001% a 'high chance'


    P.S. How do you quote things from other sources now?
    P.P.S. Apologies for the Off Topic P.S.
    P.P.P.S And that one. And this one.
  • shteev
    shteev Posts: 2,031 Chairperson of the Boards
    I just found this in the forum rules:
    13. All polls must be unbiased. They must contain at least one neutral option, and an equal amount of opposing options. (For example: Yes, Neutral, No)
    I guess we have to have that 'Not planning to purchase' option after all. BY LAW.
  • Volrak
    Volrak Posts: 732 Critical Contributor
    shteev said:
    I just found this in the forum rules:
    13. All polls must be unbiased. They must contain at least one neutral option, and an equal amount of opposing options. (For example: Yes, Neutral, No)
    I guess we have to have that 'Not planning to purchase' option after all. BY LAW.
    That's an... interesting rule.  One could be forgiven for succumbing to the temptation to argue in response that all 8 card options are neutral options which oppose each other in perfect balance.  Of course, such a proposal would naturally lead to further familiar diversions into how well cards of different drop probabilities could perform their function as opposing options, followed by enlivened musings on whether such perfect opposition could be achieved even in theory without knowing the exact drop rates.  I guess it's another reminder that everyone has more fun when they follow the rules!
  • bk1234
    bk1234 Posts: 2,924 Chairperson of the Boards
    edited April 2017
    There's nothing here that excites me that I don't already have 

Categories