RNG
My games never consist of truly random card draws. I have never started with a full hand of lands or a full hand of spells. There has always been at least one land and never more than like 4 or 5. Not only that, Whenever I build a new deck (Brawl), I'm ALWAYS going against another person who has a similar deck as myself. I feel that this game isn't truly random like MTG in person is. I always try to play for fun and never really play ranked because my goal is simply to build decks and have fun with it no matter the outcome. I feel that the lack of randomness truly negates this games' full potential.
Suggestion: Make the game truly random.
Reasoning: By making the game truly random, you end up enabling people to think about where a deck they built is truly weak and where they could make inprovements.
Example: MTG in real life, I have build many decks. One of which I have built over the course of years of fine tuning. It isn't a one turn win deck or anything, but it functions as intended in various scenarios.
2sips#24492
shared this idea
-
Rezzahan#77802
commented
In any nonladder match, the hand smoothing algorithm attempts to smooth out your land count in your opening first hand, by generasting three hands and presenting the one closest to your land count in the deck.
As for randomness, you and many others do not realize just how inefficient and nonrandom manual shuffling in paper Magic is. You'd have to shuffle for hours on end just to get close to a uniform distribution of permutations. Arena actually gives a uniform distribution, or at least as close as RNG can get. This discrepancy between paper Magic and Arena results in more niche draws than in paper. But it is not Arena that is broken, but rather the limitations of paper Magic shuffling. As a result, you can get away with the common 24 land count in 60 card decks most of the time, but in Arena you need more. 25-27 is usually the right number here to get to your fourth or fifth land reliably.
Also, the sheer number of games played on Arena in a week usually dwarfs what you play in paper in a year. So of course you get a lot more niche games due to that volume. And people remember the bad games way better than the dozens others where everything went smoothly. You remember the two or three games that went bad, but do you remember how many other games you played? It gets foggy quick. Was it a dozen, two dozen, more? 3 in 12 is way more than 3 in 24, or 3 in 50. but the mind only sees 3 in many, and sees all such days as equally bad.