I had 3 events in my hand in the last game that i played, i discarded all but i got all 3 of them back. The first card that i draw was an event and the second an other event. So i lost the game just because i didn’t have any creature to play at the start and the funny part is that i have only 5 events in that deck.

You need to change how the mulligan works. I shouldn’t get back the same cards that i discarded or any other copy of the same cards because the point of the mulligan is to help when you have a bad starting hand but it’s pointless if I get the same cards that I discarded. I’m sure that everybody agree with this because if this happens in an important game like the Monthly Cup, the other player will win just by pure luck and I’m sure that nobody wants this.

I have wondered about this but not sure if it’s chance/confirmation bias. Most of the time I would get back at least 1 card I discarded. What’s the chance of that if you have 3 copies of 10 different cards in the deck? Assuming you discard all 3 cards…

Need to revise my probability/permutation from high school…

Chance to get any single card - if you run 3 of them - is 3/30, 1/10, which is pretty huge, esp. if you mulligan. Confirmation bias on top, and there ya go.

I don’t think mulligan needs any chances.

So you think that it’s ok to get back exactly the same 3 cards that you discarded and lose because you can’t play nothing at the start of the game?

Yep. As stated above.

I thought you wanted a game based on skill and not on RNG but apparently I was wrong

Card games revolve around RNG. There is a reason why none of these games let you decide which card you draw first, second, fifth, sixteenth, etc. At any point in the game, you don’t know what cards you are going to draw. The mulligan already halves the chance of you getting a bad hand. If you put in 3 copies of a card you can’t use that is a strategic risk you made in deck building, you decide how flexible your own deck will be.

I don’t agree with you, I don’t think it should remove extra copies from being drawn when you mulligan.

That would be an underhanded design (it interferes with the nature of drawing a random card), it is neither intuitive nor particularly fair.

Making it so that the cards that you mulligan are actually discarded could lead to some rather funny situations… or maybe one of the cards that you mulligan, chosen at random!

I think mulliganing three cards and getting back three copies of one of them is a bit too much, so I’d like it if the single card that you mulligan isn’t shuffled back until you get your first natural draw, though I agree that having the ability to remove 9 cards from your mulligan would be detrimental; removing too much variety from the game.

This is a personal attack, not an argument. Laughable one at that, since you don’t know me one bit, so you have to assume what I want only for it to work for your ad personam.

Bottomline: if your problem is rng, then your solution does not solve anything. You will still get bad mulligans. Then you will want more rng hunting I take it? Untill what point? 30-card hand I assume?

It depends on whether or not you drew multiples in your starting hand. If we assume you drew 3 unique cards, and mulliganed away all of them, and that your deck only contains 10 unique cards, each in 3 copies, then your odds of drawing at least one copy of a card you threw away is…

1 - (21/30) * (20/29) * (19/28) = 0.67

…So you have a 67% chance of drawing at least one of the cards you threw away.

EDIT: To explain the math, what I was actually doing is computing the odds that you don’t draw any of the 9 cards in your deck that were mulliganed away, and then taking the inverse by subtracting from 1

Personal? When i say “you” I mean all of you.

Maybe removing 9 cards is too much but redrawing the same 3 unic cards is too bad

Personal as in ad personam, i.e. aimed at person(s) and not at arguments. You accuse people instead of arguing about concepts.

I said that because it seems like you want to build a good competitive evirement but it can work only if the game is skill-based. I understand that it’s a card game and it will always be some RNG involved but this doesn’t mean that you have to increase it because at that point the competitive part makes no sense anymore

Then explain, why your take on rng is better? Existing one has an advantage of being cohesive and has status quo. Your approach has the disadvantage of “rng removing” clause. Your take on rng is symetric and thus leaves the environement exactly as rng based as before - and has the stigma of “because I had a bad game”. I am yet to see a solid argument.

An experienced player is able to win even if they get nothing but events in the first turn. If your deck contains so many you draw nothing but events for the first Three turns, Then you are in big trouble.

I have found that mulliganing the entire hand greatly reduces the chances of getting the same cards the second time. In partial mulligans, the chance of that happening is about 50%. Which is a bit high, but I don’t see how it can be improved

3/28 is 50% how exactly? O_o

What I meant is - in a partial mulligan, I seem to draw the same cards about half the time. Based purely on personal experience, not maths. Sorry for any confusion.

They should have done it long ago. I do not understand what awaits Abraham

The thing is , I also doubt, that the mulligan is not faulty. Yes, there is a chance that when you have 3 cards of one name in your hand, even if you mulligan it , you will receive it again. But it is only a chance, not 80-85%probability.

In fact, there is something strange in Faeria about mulligan. Very very often when I receive some unique card in the hand, after I mulligan it, I receive it again. As if the deck was not shuffled, but just the card was put back on it, and then again taken. It happened many many times, especially, when I mulligan 1 card from 3. About 85%chance that I will have a card back if I mulligan only 1 card. That’s why I now prefer to mulligan all three cards even if I do not like one card. In this case, the probability of different cards seems higher.