dice 10d144

Rolled 116, 109, 75, 100, 93, 5, 30, 91, 21, 41 = 681 (10d144)

Whoops, let's try that again

>>49612740
should also attach the money to these calculations so people get an idea of the cash involved
i don't know the usd price but in dollarydoos you'd be paying six a booster if buying individual
so far that's $60

>>49613480
>six dollar a booster if buying individual
whatever gaming store you play at, run away. run as fast and as far as you can.

>>49613512
>Dollarydoos

Rolled 65, 16, 131, 133, 12, 120, 92, 119, 125, 69 = 882 (10d144)

>>49613480
You can get these bundle pack things for about $44, and they have 10 boosters in them. I'm gonna try again, for a total of $88.

>>49612731
>She sure got a purty mouth there.

Rolled 26, 130, 5, 28, 137 = 326 (5d144)

>>49613549
I don't want to spend more than $100, so let's just say each booster is $4, and I'll buy 5 more.

Y'all need Jesus.

File: images.jpg (3KB, 240x160px) Image search: [Google]

3KB, 240x160px

>>49613618
>143

Rolled 18 (1d144)

What if I bought just one pack

Rolled 88, 137, 119, 127, 16, 47, 27, 15, 22, 24 = 622 (10d144)

>>49612731

Rolled 59, 66, 136, 115, 58, 64, 89, 63, 46, 99 = 795 (10d144)

>>49612731
I don't even play MTG you poltroons, but I'll roll anyway. Burn your money as you see fit.

>>49613527
>not knowing the name of trumps patented new fiat money so he can use the real money to pay off the national debt

Rolled 1, 11, 124, 112, 117, 60, 107, 118, 111, 8 = 769 (10d144)

Could luck be on my side?

>>49613697
A 1 is impressive in its own way.

So far, over 100 packs have been opened in this thread, or $400+. Still no masterpiece.

Rolled 47 (1d144)

>>49613733
It's time to stop anon. Here I'll buy you one more pack but you need to save your money for food and stuff.

>kaladesh booster box is 90-100 bucks
>buy 10 booster packs for $45
I agree that it's futile to crack boosters for a masterpiece, but let's not be a fucking moron just to prove your point.

Rolled 60, 135, 115, 32, 20, 135, 129, 77, 112, 99 = 914 (10d144)

>>49613757
Nonsense. I can just hunt and eat the smaller nerds.

File: !wut.gif (127KB, 500x279px)

127KB, 500x279px

>>49613722
>A 1 is impressive in its own way.
A 54 and 138 are impressive in their own ways too.

You sad fucks are demonstrating how people don't understand statistics...and this is why WOTC has been rolling in money since the 90s.

>>49613733
>Good thing I am not a filthy poorfag
Equitable wealth transfer from the stupid to the clever is certainly heartwarming.

>>49613782
You can only roll 25 dice at a time.

>>49613765
It's cheaper to buy in bulk, true.

>>49613764
Sadly, it doesn't always pay off. But, booster boxes have 36 boosters in them.

Rolled 17, 137, 24, 47, 68, 6, 99, 1, 27, 139, 121, 95, 89, 82, 125, 89, 73, 128, 40, 88, 26, 120, 125, 17, 64 = 1847 (25d144)

Just one box. I'll make sure to stop after one box no matter what.

Rolled 83, 1, 64, 10, 85, 96, 16, 101, 144, 2, 144 = 746 (11d144)

>>49613828

Rolled 47, 135, 37, 23, 126, 17, 126, 142, 26, 140 = 819 (10d144)

This one sounds like a winner when i shake it hard enough.

File: 1404573822335.jpg (142KB, 330x500px) Image search: [Google]

142KB, 330x500px

>>49613839
>144
>144

>>49613839
I'M FREE.

THANK YOU BASED RNG.

>>49613850

Now line up all the masterpieces and roll for two to see which one you got.

I hope you got gearhulks, fag.

>>49613839
>A 144 after about 300 "booster packs" get cracked
This crash course in statistics brought to you by 4chan.

>>49613839
I AM GONNA FUCKING KILL YOU

Rolled 31, 28, 79, 60, 95, 122, 95, 34, 86, 33, 104, 38, 68, 116, 112, 60, 75, 71, 127, 78, 20, 91, 38, 127, 139 = 1927 (25d144)

>>49612731
Seeing as I already have one box... unopened at the moment, mind. Was actually saving it for future Limited use.

File: piracy.gif (1MB, 640x360px)

1MB, 640x360px

Rolled 83, 7, 139, 96, 9, 24, 117, 66, 87, 91 = 719 (10d144)

I want to get something nice.

>>49613512
That's the standard going price for them here in Australia.

>>49613873
Two 144's.
>>49613867
We got a list anywhere?

Rolled 90, 109, 115, 108, 129, 139, 127, 1, 133, 93, 21 = 1065 (11d144)

>>49613893
Does this max out at 25 dice? Fine, the rest.

>>49613893
>>49613898
Here's hoping your real box does better.

>>49613902
Mythicspoiler has it.

>>49613902

here:
http://magic.wizards.com/en/articles/archive/feature/masterpiece-series-kaladesh-inventions-2016-09-12

Now roll them, fag.

>>49613899
For anyone without access to a currency converter, that's $4.59 in USD.

Rolled 12, 1 = 13 (2d30)

>>49613839
And now let's see what you've won!
I'm going from the list in Wizard's site, starting from top left.

Rolled 27, 5 = 32 (2d30)

Going

12
34

>>49613910
If I can crack $82 out of it, Masterpiece or no, I'll do fine. Just gotta pin more hopes on copters now that they're over $10.

>>49613937
You get a Gauntlet of Power and a Cataclysmic Gearhulk!

Wanna buy another set for a shot at a Crypt?

>>49613937
>Gauntlet, Gearhulk

>>49613941
>Gearhulk, Overseer

Second one's acceptable.

>>49613941
Verduous Gearhulk and Steel Overseer.

Seems cool.

Rolled 49, 114, 47, 102, 92, 142, 117, 118, 85, 35 = 901 (10d144)

>>49612731
i got motherfucking chandra, torch of defiance in the first kaladesh booster that i came with the nissa planewalker deck intro thing i bought today, so i'm feeling lucky.

File: 1d30.png (152KB, 636x1532px) Image search: [Google]

152KB, 636x1532px

>>49613902
Here you go, 1d30.

>>49613988
Enjoy your Metallurgic Summonings!

File: magic-pile.jpg (48KB, 476x317px)

48KB, 476x317px

Rolled 63, 13, 132, 26, 128, 144, 13, 107, 79, 16, 1, 23, 126, 85, 106, 15, 90, 107, 125, 40, 7, 68, 100, 19, 14 = 1647 (25d144)

Time to buy a booster box

>>49614006
>a hit in the first 25 alone

Wow.

Rolled 31, 41, 88, 17, 117, 56, 114, 43, 52, 132, 63 = 754 (11d144)

>>49614006
looks like the dice only goes up to 25, here are the remaining.

>>49613996

That list is wrong because all gearhulks should be listed first since they are fucking colored.

Rolled 14, 101, 140, 69, 50, 89, 103, 34, 4, 60 = 664 (10d144)

Like this?

Rolled 92, 13, 117, 137, 1, 57, 4, 23, 7, 72 = 523 (10d144)

Guess I'll buy a few packs. Maybe I'll be lucky.

>>49614028
it's alphabetical you tard

Rolled 29 (1d30)

>>49614021
ah shit, I didnt notice that. Well I guess that's good luck, I guess I will buy an actual box now.

>>49613923
Now let's roll to see which one I get.

>>49614041

Look up the fucking COLLECTOR'S NUMBER, fag.

Rolled 6 (1d30)

>>49614006
And here is your prize!

Rolled 13, 50, 141, 27, 88, 90, 37, 74, 121, 20 = 661 (10d144)

>>49614040
Buying more.

File: en_HQv0KcxKlr.png (191KB, 265x370px) Image search: [Google]

191KB, 265x370px

>>49614047
holy shit

Rolled 61, 112, 5, 31, 117, 132, 138, 76, 135, 35, 6, 76, 78, 114, 112, 136, 43, 74, 4, 12, 67, 100, 139, 86, 50 = 1939 (25d144)

Looks like boxes are where it's at boys. Let's go.

>>49613996
>>49614041
Not that guy but the goddamn cards have their own numbers.

Rolled 108, 105, 131, 127, 128, 3, 28, 97, 103, 143, 29 = 1002 (11d144)

>>49614072

>>49614082
Let's go by the card numbers, and just use that chart as a quick reference for their current prices.

>>49614095
>143

Better luck next time, Bobby.

>>49614095
>143

Fuck

Rolled 17, 54, 24, 93, 89, 19, 5, 80, 94, 120 = 595 (10d144)

>>49612731
lets see if i get one?

>>49614065
>>49614106

So you unplug the sword from the tank or wear it on your back/offhand like an UR Snapcaster mage?

>>49614109
>>49614106
You guys know thats not how statistics work, right? 143 is just as close as 1 in this case.

>>49613950
>the smugster is now 15 in scg
oh wow, is it already proven to be that good?

File: 172.jpg (91KB, 554x439px)

91KB, 554x439px

>>49614129
I sell it on ebay for tons of monies

I'll buy a booster box!

>>49614141
32 Smugs in top 8 or something like that. Funny enough no serious impact on the promo price, yet.

>>49614141

it's the new spellqueller. It should come down after a few months.

>>49614129
Look closer. The tank is mounted on a powered glove.

Rolled 20, 41, 51, 82, 115, 41, 57, 51, 10, 121, 88, 109, 25, 103, 87, 124, 69, 79, 122, 65, 83, 6, 61, 39, 86 = 1735 (25d144)

>>49614170
Let's try this again...

>>49614177

Wow. I wonder how many /k/ommandos would be triggered at such design.

>>49614129
Yeah like Snappy but imagine there's a sword protruding from the ice tank.

>>49614174
>>49614176
How about the flagship? I imagine it's not good due to the high crew requirement?

Rolled 71, 128, 15, 109, 110, 92, 112, 77, 17, 13, 133, 110 = 987 (12d144)

12 packs is 1/3 of a box
With my luck it would be garbage pull but a pull none the less

dice+10d144

fuck you I'm gonna get it my first try

>>49613682
>real money
>actually money

Rolled 66, 52, 128, 51, 113, 71, 51, 137, 50, 7 = 726 (10d144)

>>49614238
I fucked up

Rolled 52, 73, 121, 32, 140, 25, 120, 104, 33, 54 = 754 (10d144)

>>49614255

The probabilities you are using are wrong and retarded, as you are essentially replacing a booster pack back into the pool with every roll. The actual probability, using real math is as follows.

1/144+ (143/144)(1/143)+(143/144)(142/143)(1/142)+(143/142)(142/143)(141/142)(1/141)+...+(143/144)(142/143)(141/142)(140/141)(139/140)(138/139)(137/138)(136/137)(135/136)(1/135)=.069=6%

>>49614519
Doesn't that round to 7%?

>>49614549
Yes, I was doing math quickly.

>>49614519
>as you are essentially replacing a booster pack back into the pool with every roll
can you explain this to someone who is dumb and retarded?
isn't each booster treated as its own probability? ie flipping 10 coins each has a 50% chance with no effect on each other.

Rolled 79, 35, 46, 93, 53, 121, 75, 38, 88, 107, 55, 119, 111, 105, 33, 21, 25, 102, 14, 106, 113, 88, 63, 111, 61 = 1862 (25d144)

Rolled 31, 34, 60, 34, 42, 97, 86, 109, 93, 70, 78 = 734 (11d144)

>>49615098

Rolled 53, 62, 99, 26, 106, 118, 95, 102, 114, 113, 65, 95, 66, 19, 81, 115, 51, 89, 52, 139, 61, 86, 144, 12 = 1963 (24d144)

Bought a box to draft with friends. Let's see if one of us pull one.

Rolled 32, 36, 100, 71, 22, 121, 2, 41, 121, 90, 19, 79, 55, 18, 125, 24, 59, 124, 117, 2, 127, 104, 70, 119, 5 = 1683 (25d144)

Testing

File: image.jpg (1MB, 3264x2448px)

1MB, 3264x2448px

i just did a casual draft win friends using a pool of loose kaladesh packs. I brought the 11 pack prize i got from prerelease that i was saving for this. This is what i pulled from those packs. Foil blue hulk, green hulk, chandra, and scroll rack. Never bought a kaladesh pack other than what i needed to enter the prerelease. I probably got the equivalent of a lottery win

Packs required in order to have (100X)% chance of success: x=1-(143/144)^n
>50%: 100
>90%: 331
>99%: 661

>>49614519
They're independent events, and should be treated as such, unless you somehow buy from somewhere that guarantees entirely different packs each time.

>>49615335
Fuck, accidentally deleted:
Packs = log(1-x)/log(143/144)

>>49614674
>isn't each booster treated as its own probability?
No. The outcome is independent of the process. In the sum total of all booster packs ever produced by Wizards, there are a finite number of Masterpieces in the pool, and booster packs in the pool.

Think of it this way. Wizards prints two packs for a tournament. Winner picks one, and the runner up gets the second. One pack is full of commons. The other is full of masterpieces.

The chances of the winner pulling the master piece pack is 1/2. Conversely, the chance of the runner up getting the master piece pack is 1/2. Winner picks and he opens the pack, only to discover that his pack is full of commons.

Does this mean that the runner up has a 1/2 chance of pulling a masterpiece? No, his chance is 100%, because the winner changed the pool and thus the remaining odds.

What did was the exact same thing, except extrapolated to 1 out of every 144 packs, (assuming the probability is a hard fast number, and local game stores don't do any tampering themselves, and they tend to keep packs from boxes together in the same display.), and cut off for only 10 boosters.

>>49615410
okay, i think i understand the basic concept there.
thanks for explaining anon

>>49615410
Your post still only works if there's exactly one success and exactly 144 cards in the population.
Now, I don't play MtG, but I'm fairly sure there's more than 1 masterpiece and more than 144 cards. We're not picking ten packs out of 144, we're picking ten packs out of every pack made, where the population has a success chance of 1/144.
Feel free to correct me if there are actually only 144 booster packs total, though.

>>49615335
The number of packs needed to get a master piece, even assuming they were to be independent events would be 144, as this situation could be described as a geometric series, and the expected value of a geometric series is 1/p.
Also,

> unless you somehow buy from somewhere that guarantees entirely different packs each time

If anything this is what would make opening packs closer to being actually independent, but they aren't, unless I am mistaken in how wizards distributes their cards. Do they randomly generate a number and then insert a card into a pack, or do they create X number of masterpieces, inserted in X packs, put into a pull of Y packs?

>>49615165
Congrats friend!

>>49615532
It would depend how carefully Wizards distributes their masterpieces. For example, if the "concentration" so to speak of masterpieces was ideal and perfect, then no matter how we cut the population in our toy model slice, there would be 1 masterpiece per 144 cards. Now obviously there is going to be some variance, but I am arguing that the actual probability is more than just the equivalent of flipping a 144 sided coin every time.

Assuming that this masterpiece is the same as the zendikar ones in probability, the packs are probably weighted anyway. It's not much but out of about 50 cases i have seen opened (zendikar ones), i have literally never seen someone whiffed opening an Expedition on a case. About two thirds of them opened two in a case. There's never two in a booster box, but very rarely there can be an expedition and a mythic foil in a booster box.

So in summary. If you reeeeeeeally wanted the experience of opening a masterpiece at whatever cost, buy a case, crack till you get it, sell the rest.

>>49615544
>The number of packs needed to get a master piece, even assuming they were to be independent events would be 144
What? ...what?
That's not even remotely true. Are you sure you know what an independent event is? We're looking at a simple binomial model with p=1/144.
Expected value is not guaranteed value, with the simple counterexample that it's possible to get heads twice in a row from a coin flip. What it means is that, if we repeated "how long does it take to get a Masterpiece" over and over, all those trials would eventually average out to 144. Not that each one would be 144.
>this is what would make opening packs closer to being actually independent
No, that's dependent. I think you have your terms backwards.

>>49615611
But if we don't know the probability for our sample, we gain nothing by assuming a varied concentration throughout the population. I agree that the actual answer is more complicated than this, but we don't have enough information to make a more accurate model if all we're given (by the OP at least) is P(success) for the whole population.

>>49615699
>We're looking at a simple binomial model with p=1/144.

You're right, I had a momentary lapse in judgement.

>No, that's dependent. I think you have your terms backwards.
We have different ideas on the initial conditions, and what bringing in extra packs would do.

>we gain nothing
We gain a lower bound.

>>49615924
Fair enough. I don't know how assuming an uneven distribution gives us a lower bound, though. Without more information, the lower bound us that p could be effectively zero until large values if n, right?

>>49615980
>I don't know how assuming an uneven distribution

In my post describing the percent chance of pulling a master piece, I was assuming an even distribution. An uneven distribution should give as an upper bound.

I will admit from here out that my knowledge of statistics grows sparse.

>Without more information, the lower bound us that p could be effectively zero until large values if n, right?

I wouldn't say that, I would say that it adds more more set of conditions to factor in, which most likely would drive the probability down. In extreme cases, I'm sure it would be possible, say all master pieces were located on one pallet of booster boxes in a warehouse.

>>49615611
I work at a game store and have opened cases and cases of product for this set. There are ~ 1 1/2 Masterpieces per case. Never gotten fewer than one or more than two.

Just like there are ~2 copies of each mythic per case. Sure, sometimes you spike three or four and sometimes you get fucked, but it averages to two often enough to reasonably count on it when you're opening product to sell.

>>49616088
I see what you're saying. The reason I don't think we should consider uneven distribution is because we have no knowledge on how they're uneven, and so we would have to consider extremes (p is roughly 0, p is roughly 1) as potentially valid. If we knew more, like if WotC shipped double Masterpieces to certain areas, then we could come to a more nuanced and accurate conclusion.
I use simple binomial for this problem because I assume that the population being sampled from is really big, say about 10k total cards made, and about 100 masterpieces, because then, the probability is very, very close to that of a repeated independent event, which is easier to calculate.

File: dick-sucking lips.png (103KB, 148x370px)

103KB, 148x370px

>>49613552

File: YeW8hZq.png (239KB, 610x406px) Image search: [Google]

239KB, 610x406px

One player in my group opened two boxes and got a Masterpiece.

For BFZ, I opened two fat packs (18 boosters or 1/2 of a box; I wanted the basics) and got an Expedition.

Earlier this year, I bought the last 9 boosters that my local walmart had because fuck it why not. I got two of the same mythic - none other than Ugin.

Clearly I have better than usual luck, so I can safely expect to get approximately 12 masterpieces out of a case. $500+ well spent!!

>>49617424
>*last 9 fate reforged boosters
fuck

File: Xxbng.jpg (96KB, 1338x716px) Image search: [Google]

96KB, 1338x716px

>This entire thread.
Reminder that you can get the entire cardpool of any LCG for less than 400$. CCG business model is cancer.

File: file.png (2MB, 1577x665px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1577x665px

>decided to draft practice
>going through
>pulling together an allright R/G vehicle stompy deck.
>i get passed this

Rolled 45 (1d144)

>>49612731
Thanks for reminding me how tough times are anon.

>>49612731
The much lower price on non-masterpieces also means that stores are much less incentivized to crack packs for singles as they won't turn a profit in them.

I have a feeling that this masterpiece plan might actually end up backfiring on Wizards.

Rolled 90 (1d144)

>>49612731
Three Limited events have I attended.
Three times has the guy to my right opened an Invention.

Have at thee.

Rolled 128 (1d144)

>>49612731
I'm feeling lucky.

Are we actually fucking pretending to open booster packs now? Is that what this hobby has come to? Fuck... I do kinda wanna go out and buy some boosters now though and see what I get...

>>49612731
You gotta open 3420 boosters for a specific Masterwork, 110 boosters for a specific Mythic Rare or 56 boosters for a specific Rare.
And someone's gotta do it, so either you play the lottery or you pay SCG the money they wasted playing the lottery for you.

Knowing how hard it is to open this shit doesn't change anything.

File: thinger.gif (332KB, 500x281px)

332KB, 500x281px

Rolled 25, 41, 2, 109, 122, 139, 13, 131, 125, 28, 72, 122, 141, 102, 123, 144, 90, 103, 27, 57, 92, 131, 73, 2, 33 = 2047 (25d144)

>>49612731

>>49612731
Who do you think you're convincing? A masterpiece is the overall goal but some people enjoy opening packs

>>49618568
This.

Rolled 30, 58, 112, 68, 2, 70, 42, 29, 6, 133, 101, 68, 76, 16, 101, 75, 44, 21, 86, 22, 45, 26, 83, 132, 32 = 1478 (25d144)

Checking if I'm as lucky in pretend)world as I am in real life
>I told my wife the only two masterpieces I wouldn't trade are Scroll Rack and SoFi
>Open both in 1.5 boxes
>shiggydiggy

Rolled 19, 101, 138, 32, 35, 123, 114, 128, 59, 109, 36, 105, 63, 31, 12, 30, 88, 2, 102, 65, 105, 46, 141, 93, 71 = 1848 (25d144)

>>49621331
Either 68 or 101 is Syndicate trafficer
>Opened a playset in 54 packs

dice+10d144

I just want to try this.
So, I'm in Canada, pack is about $5ish.
So. Unless I fucked up how to roll, here's 50 Loonies worth of cards.

Rolled 126, 91, 55, 73, 44, 125, 106, 5, 56, 107 = 788 (10d144)

>>49622870
lol. looks like I suck at dice