4

I have very fond memories of (Triple) Innistrad, which is an absolutely amazing draft format, probably without equal.

I'd like to be able to have a playset that I can pull out, years from now, and draft amongst my friends.

I want a complete set that also serves as a rough facsimile of drafting from packs, i.e. with a card distribution roughly similar to actual Limited rather than Cube — including both the rarity distribution and the chance to see multiples of various cards, which is vital to actually being able to play the set in Limited as intended. I don't mind taking some time to set up "packs" before drafting or sort cards afterward.

How many copies of each card would I need, by rarity, to supply one draft pod (of 6-8 players), with a card distribution roughly similar to a real draft?

  • 1
    @Rainbolt This seems a little different - knowing the potential composition of a single pack is a prerequisite for doing this, but you also have to figure out what kind of variance you need across multiple packs, which I don't think the other question addresses. It's possible that the OP on the other question meant to be asking about drafting, but it wasn't really explicit so the answers didn't address it. – Cascabel Apr 2 '15 at 0:33
  • 1
    @Rainbolt If you crack a half-box worth of cards to draft, not every card will show up every time, even at lower rarities. I'm asking for information about how to compare the composition of drawing packs from a fixed pool (where there might only be, say, 3 Spider Spawnings in existence at all) vs. an unlimited one. This is not at all addressed by the question of "What's in an Innistrad pack?" (which is trivial to research). – Alex P Apr 2 '15 at 1:50
  • 1
    @Rainbolt ... Err, because I want to actually enjoy Innistrad Draft, not Duplicate Innistrad Draft? Part of the technical achievement of the set is that there are really cool combo-like archetypes that emerge sometimes but can't just be forced every round, and variance in the card pool is a big part of that. – Alex P Apr 2 '15 at 3:41
  • 1
    @Rainbolt You fundamentally misunderstand the question. I have no idea how to explain this to you in any more detail. – Alex P Apr 2 '15 at 3:48
  • 2
    @Rainbolt That's not at all the same thing. You'll have to know how many drafts you'll ever run, forever (or find yourself trying to buy more out-of-print cards in several years, have fun with the prices...). You'll know what's in each draft's card pool (I guess you could try to find someone to randomize and buy cards for you... someone who won't also want to draft the cards they're buying...?). The point is to own a draftable set, full stop. You can't just tell the OP, don't do what you want to do, do something else instead. – Cascabel Apr 2 '15 at 3:55
4

It depends on how you want to build your packs. If you plan to build proper packs then the choices are different then if you just want to grab random cards. The best experience would be from the former so I will go off it.

The double faced cards were seeded from a sheet with a single mythic, two of each rare, six of each uncommon and eleven and each common. Although you could reduce the card count by half if you wanted without killing the chances too much (more Garruk and higher or lower common chance to taste). Pretty straight forward to reproduce for either 60 or 121 cards (mostly common).

Your normal rare and mythic slot would be best served by one of each mythic and two of each rare, but you can design a system to reproduce the 1/8 ratio (remember there are 4 rares per mythic) such as using half the mythic cards you have before shuffling the rares.

Going to common and uncommon you probably want to drastically cut the number of copies. I would think two of each uncommon would be enough, although you could do three if you wanted that possibility. Similarly with commons four to six would work depending on how many dupes you want to see.

For simplicity I would either pick 1:1:2:4 or 1:1:3:5 for each card type and handle the various slots separately. Although once you have built this out (or have a tool to test) you could try just building normal packs from either ratio and see what rarity density you see.

Finally if you wanted really good packs it may make sense to pre-seed each pack with a common of each color (or two cards of each color if not segregating by rarity). While that doesn't eliminate packs that suck for some people it does stop the "nothing in my color first pick" annoyance in cubes.

  • 1
    Yeah, seeing a reasonable number of dupes is important. A lot of draft strategies involved stuff like picking up lots of Geistflames. – Alex P Apr 1 '15 at 1:44
  • @AlexP Remember that the more copies of cards you include, the more possible variance and the more realistic of the original draft format your cube will be. I am personally building a high variance Conspiracy cube that will start at 2:4:6:10, but I may bring up to 3:7:8:14 eventually. In addition, this allows for up to 16 people to draft the cube, aka, two pods, so I can run a tournament with it eventually. – Waterseas Apr 1 '15 at 13:48
  • @Waterseas Did you do any math to figure out those were the numbers you wanted for acceptable variance? If so, I'd love to see an explanation of your approach. – Alex P Apr 1 '15 at 13:52
  • The commons and uncommons were just rough, proportionate estimates to have the same variance as the rare slot. However, the math I did do was for the rare slot; I went on the gatherer, figured out how many mythics and how many rares were in the set, then tried to put in enough rares and mythics to get as close to the 1:8 mythic to rare ratio as possible. At a 2:4 ratio (1:2) of rares to mythics, my rare to mythic ratio is about 1:7.1. If I ever up the cube size, with a 3:7 ratio, the rare to mythic ratio will be about 1:8.2. – Waterseas Apr 1 '15 at 14:11

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.