Mythic wildcards are kind of meh. Rare wildcards are like 10x as valuable anyway. I feel like I just blow my mythic wildcards on jank for fun but I never have half the rare wildcards I need.
Bolas wins and then goes up against phyrexia. We get all new walkers plus elspeth
and we all get planeswalker grave tokens... and Tibalt, because no one would bother to kill him.
I would be sad if Jace died, he is the iconic planswalker to me, but the others are pretty boring. I like the older flawed planeswalkers like Urza and Sorin with cosmic power and petty grudges rather than the more heroic ones we have now.
Maybe if Bolas wins and does something with the planeswalker sparks, they could restrain themselves from printing 3 new planeswalkers every single set too.
I'm fine with Planeswalkers every set, I'm just sick of half of them being the same people.
Give us Ugin, Vivien Reed and Elspeth trying to use the Eldrazi to stop Phyrexia and Bolas from invading every world. That's why Ugin was so pissed when they killed Ulamog, they act like cosmic vacuums killing anything bigger than a single planeswalker they find between worlds.
I mean Emrakul is totally travelling back in time to save both other Eldrazi Titans and/or crash a moon into New New Phyrexia at some point, so that'll be Emra-cool
i mean, if you think very incredibly sideways about it, keyblades are basically the same as planeswalker sparks.
they let you travel between dimensions and call on the hearts of creatures you've formed a bond with or something,
and the user usually fixes or ruins an entire world during every plot arc.
Enabled "Smooth Shuffling" for the Play queue.
Important Note: This is for the "Play" queue only. It does not apply to Ranked Traditional Play, Traditional Ranked, or any other events and/or formats.
More Information on Smooth Shuffling: We are currently testing changes to the shuffler algorithm to decrease the number of games with extreme examples of "mana flood" or "mana screw" (drawing too many or too few lands). While players may still find themselves in these scenarios, the shuffler changes are intended to mitigate the rarest scenarios, such as drawing 8+ Land cards in a row. As noted above, we are only testing these changes in the "Play" queue, and it does not apply to any Ranked or Traditional formats. We are using this opportunity to gather more data and to fine tune these changes, as well as allow for player feedback. All shuffles are still randomly generated, The difference is we now look deeper into the decks to determine a pool of shuffles to randomly choose from. We are planning to iterate on this fairly rapidly. and will provide more information as these changes develop and solidify.
For all best of one play queues, we have increased the number of deck shuffles and starting hands we consider to three (up from two).
For all best of one play queues, we now apply the starting hand approach to mulligan hands as well.
More Information on Starting Hands: Our goal with this change is to ensure you're still on "even shuffler ground" with your starting hand, even when you mulligan. As with the other shuffler change, we are using this opportunity to gather more data and to fine tune these changes, as well as gather player feedback.
I think this is probably good? I like that they are testing it in the unranked mode first, even though ranked isn't particularly super hardcore or anything at the moment, it's good for future tests. No one likes hitting 8 lands in a row, but they do need to be careful about making things too extreme I think.
Enabled "Smooth Shuffling" for the Play queue.
Important Note: This is for the "Play" queue only. It does not apply to Ranked Traditional Play, Traditional Ranked, or any other events and/or formats.
More Information on Smooth Shuffling: We are currently testing changes to the shuffler algorithm to decrease the number of games with extreme examples of "mana flood" or "mana screw" (drawing too many or too few lands). While players may still find themselves in these scenarios, the shuffler changes are intended to mitigate the rarest scenarios, such as drawing 8+ Land cards in a row. As noted above, we are only testing these changes in the "Play" queue, and it does not apply to any Ranked or Traditional formats. We are using this opportunity to gather more data and to fine tune these changes, as well as allow for player feedback. All shuffles are still randomly generated, The difference is we now look deeper into the decks to determine a pool of shuffles to randomly choose from. We are planning to iterate on this fairly rapidly. and will provide more information as these changes develop and solidify.
For all best of one play queues, we have increased the number of deck shuffles and starting hands we consider to three (up from two).
For all best of one play queues, we now apply the starting hand approach to mulligan hands as well.
More Information on Starting Hands: Our goal with this change is to ensure you're still on "even shuffler ground" with your starting hand, even when you mulligan. As with the other shuffler change, we are using this opportunity to gather more data and to fine tune these changes, as well as gather player feedback.
I think this is probably good? I like that they are testing it in the unranked mode first, even though ranked isn't particularly super hardcore or anything at the moment, it's good for future tests. No one likes hitting 8 lands in a row, but they do need to be careful about making things too extreme I think.
It's one of those weird things where like
I find lands a really interesting element of Magic, and every game that removes them loses something in the process
but there is literally nothing interesting about dramatic mana flood/screw, and while that's something that's clearly impossible to remove from paper... in digital, it's not.
I'm reluctant to remove things that are present in paper magic, because I worry that if they get too far apart it'll be a different thing and not equivalent, which is part of why I like MTGA so much.
On the other hand, no one likes being flooded or screwed, so if they can reduce those chances while still keeping what makes things great, it's probably awesome?
Enabled "Smooth Shuffling" for the Play queue.
Important Note: This is for the "Play" queue only. It does not apply to Ranked Traditional Play, Traditional Ranked, or any other events and/or formats.
More Information on Smooth Shuffling: We are currently testing changes to the shuffler algorithm to decrease the number of games with extreme examples of "mana flood" or "mana screw" (drawing too many or too few lands). While players may still find themselves in these scenarios, the shuffler changes are intended to mitigate the rarest scenarios, such as drawing 8+ Land cards in a row. As noted above, we are only testing these changes in the "Play" queue, and it does not apply to any Ranked or Traditional formats. We are using this opportunity to gather more data and to fine tune these changes, as well as allow for player feedback. All shuffles are still randomly generated, The difference is we now look deeper into the decks to determine a pool of shuffles to randomly choose from. We are planning to iterate on this fairly rapidly. and will provide more information as these changes develop and solidify.
For all best of one play queues, we have increased the number of deck shuffles and starting hands we consider to three (up from two).
For all best of one play queues, we now apply the starting hand approach to mulligan hands as well.
More Information on Starting Hands: Our goal with this change is to ensure you're still on "even shuffler ground" with your starting hand, even when you mulligan. As with the other shuffler change, we are using this opportunity to gather more data and to fine tune these changes, as well as gather player feedback.
I think this is probably good? I like that they are testing it in the unranked mode first, even though ranked isn't particularly super hardcore or anything at the moment, it's good for future tests. No one likes hitting 8 lands in a row, but they do need to be careful about making things too extreme I think.
Drawing 8 lands in a row in a deck with 40% lands is only a 0.06% (for each series of 8 draws) so I can't imagine that this change will be noticeable. I haven't done the math for how many random ordering of your decks contain a series of 8+ lands but I wouldn't imagine it would be over %1 of the time.
Battlenet ID: NullPointer
0
Options
TurksonNear the mountains of ColoradoRegistered Userregular
I went 5-1 and got the alt art Duress and Ghalta! I ran Sultai and lucked out with land drops and Carnage Tyrant.
Sounds like they're going to do the hand thing but with the entire deck?
Like make sure the land density doesn't deviate too much from average density overall, instead of just in the top 7 cards.
Not sure how this would effect, say, RDW with its low mana base and where it often stops rolling when it hits land pockets.
Enabled "Smooth Shuffling" for the Play queue.
Important Note: This is for the "Play" queue only. It does not apply to Ranked Traditional Play, Traditional Ranked, or any other events and/or formats.
More Information on Smooth Shuffling: We are currently testing changes to the shuffler algorithm to decrease the number of games with extreme examples of "mana flood" or "mana screw" (drawing too many or too few lands). While players may still find themselves in these scenarios, the shuffler changes are intended to mitigate the rarest scenarios, such as drawing 8+ Land cards in a row. As noted above, we are only testing these changes in the "Play" queue, and it does not apply to any Ranked or Traditional formats. We are using this opportunity to gather more data and to fine tune these changes, as well as allow for player feedback. All shuffles are still randomly generated, The difference is we now look deeper into the decks to determine a pool of shuffles to randomly choose from. We are planning to iterate on this fairly rapidly. and will provide more information as these changes develop and solidify.
For all best of one play queues, we have increased the number of deck shuffles and starting hands we consider to three (up from two).
For all best of one play queues, we now apply the starting hand approach to mulligan hands as well.
More Information on Starting Hands: Our goal with this change is to ensure you're still on "even shuffler ground" with your starting hand, even when you mulligan. As with the other shuffler change, we are using this opportunity to gather more data and to fine tune these changes, as well as gather player feedback.
I think this is probably good? I like that they are testing it in the unranked mode first, even though ranked isn't particularly super hardcore or anything at the moment, it's good for future tests. No one likes hitting 8 lands in a row, but they do need to be careful about making things too extreme I think.
This is a terrible idea. We already have people playing 16 or 17 land decks in Bo1 to great success. Now this is just going to make them even more likely to get their perfect 1 or 2 land opening hand, *and* not punish them when they mulligan.
Edit: I've been really angry lately, so here's a happy thought: Singleton is super fun when you have a collection. I'm up to 2 Ghalta's now.
cncaudata on
PSN: Broodax- battle.net: broodax#1163
+1
Options
admanbunionize your workplaceSeattle, WARegistered Userregular
Enabled "Smooth Shuffling" for the Play queue.
Important Note: This is for the "Play" queue only. It does not apply to Ranked Traditional Play, Traditional Ranked, or any other events and/or formats.
More Information on Smooth Shuffling: We are currently testing changes to the shuffler algorithm to decrease the number of games with extreme examples of "mana flood" or "mana screw" (drawing too many or too few lands). While players may still find themselves in these scenarios, the shuffler changes are intended to mitigate the rarest scenarios, such as drawing 8+ Land cards in a row. As noted above, we are only testing these changes in the "Play" queue, and it does not apply to any Ranked or Traditional formats. We are using this opportunity to gather more data and to fine tune these changes, as well as allow for player feedback. All shuffles are still randomly generated, The difference is we now look deeper into the decks to determine a pool of shuffles to randomly choose from. We are planning to iterate on this fairly rapidly. and will provide more information as these changes develop and solidify.
For all best of one play queues, we have increased the number of deck shuffles and starting hands we consider to three (up from two).
For all best of one play queues, we now apply the starting hand approach to mulligan hands as well.
More Information on Starting Hands: Our goal with this change is to ensure you're still on "even shuffler ground" with your starting hand, even when you mulligan. As with the other shuffler change, we are using this opportunity to gather more data and to fine tune these changes, as well as gather player feedback.
I think this is probably good? I like that they are testing it in the unranked mode first, even though ranked isn't particularly super hardcore or anything at the moment, it's good for future tests. No one likes hitting 8 lands in a row, but they do need to be careful about making things too extreme I think.
This is a terrible idea. We already have people playing 16 or 17 land decks in Bo1 to great success. Now this is just going to make them even more likely to get their perfect 1 or 2 land opening hand, *and* not punish them when they mulligan.
This change shouldn’t make a difference in that situation. If you roll the dice on a 1 or 2 lander you’re hoping to hit within 2-3 draws, so your maximum streak being like six isn’t gonna help you. And since the smoothing will be based on the number of lands you have you’re not gonna get a perfect draw while running eight lands.
Enabled "Smooth Shuffling" for the Play queue.
Important Note: This is for the "Play" queue only. It does not apply to Ranked Traditional Play, Traditional Ranked, or any other events and/or formats.
More Information on Smooth Shuffling: We are currently testing changes to the shuffler algorithm to decrease the number of games with extreme examples of "mana flood" or "mana screw" (drawing too many or too few lands). While players may still find themselves in these scenarios, the shuffler changes are intended to mitigate the rarest scenarios, such as drawing 8+ Land cards in a row. As noted above, we are only testing these changes in the "Play" queue, and it does not apply to any Ranked or Traditional formats. We are using this opportunity to gather more data and to fine tune these changes, as well as allow for player feedback. All shuffles are still randomly generated, The difference is we now look deeper into the decks to determine a pool of shuffles to randomly choose from. We are planning to iterate on this fairly rapidly. and will provide more information as these changes develop and solidify.
For all best of one play queues, we have increased the number of deck shuffles and starting hands we consider to three (up from two).
For all best of one play queues, we now apply the starting hand approach to mulligan hands as well.
More Information on Starting Hands: Our goal with this change is to ensure you're still on "even shuffler ground" with your starting hand, even when you mulligan. As with the other shuffler change, we are using this opportunity to gather more data and to fine tune these changes, as well as gather player feedback.
I think this is probably good? I like that they are testing it in the unranked mode first, even though ranked isn't particularly super hardcore or anything at the moment, it's good for future tests. No one likes hitting 8 lands in a row, but they do need to be careful about making things too extreme I think.
This is a terrible idea. We already have people playing 16 or 17 land decks in Bo1 to great success. Now this is just going to make them even more likely to get their perfect 1 or 2 land opening hand, *and* not punish them when they mulligan.
This change shouldn’t make a difference in that situation. If you roll the dice on a 1 or 2 lander you’re hoping to hit within 2-3 draws, so your maximum streak being like six isn’t gonna help you. And since the smoothing will be based on the number of lands you have you’re not gonna get a perfect draw while running eight lands.
It sounds like you are less likely to Light Up The Stage into two lands though.
Enabled "Smooth Shuffling" for the Play queue.
Important Note: This is for the "Play" queue only. It does not apply to Ranked Traditional Play, Traditional Ranked, or any other events and/or formats.
More Information on Smooth Shuffling: We are currently testing changes to the shuffler algorithm to decrease the number of games with extreme examples of "mana flood" or "mana screw" (drawing too many or too few lands). While players may still find themselves in these scenarios, the shuffler changes are intended to mitigate the rarest scenarios, such as drawing 8+ Land cards in a row. As noted above, we are only testing these changes in the "Play" queue, and it does not apply to any Ranked or Traditional formats. We are using this opportunity to gather more data and to fine tune these changes, as well as allow for player feedback. All shuffles are still randomly generated, The difference is we now look deeper into the decks to determine a pool of shuffles to randomly choose from. We are planning to iterate on this fairly rapidly. and will provide more information as these changes develop and solidify.
For all best of one play queues, we have increased the number of deck shuffles and starting hands we consider to three (up from two).
For all best of one play queues, we now apply the starting hand approach to mulligan hands as well.
More Information on Starting Hands: Our goal with this change is to ensure you're still on "even shuffler ground" with your starting hand, even when you mulligan. As with the other shuffler change, we are using this opportunity to gather more data and to fine tune these changes, as well as gather player feedback.
I think this is probably good? I like that they are testing it in the unranked mode first, even though ranked isn't particularly super hardcore or anything at the moment, it's good for future tests. No one likes hitting 8 lands in a row, but they do need to be careful about making things too extreme I think.
This is a terrible idea. We already have people playing 16 or 17 land decks in Bo1 to great success. Now this is just going to make them even more likely to get their perfect 1 or 2 land opening hand, *and* not punish them when they mulligan.
This change shouldn’t make a difference in that situation. If you roll the dice on a 1 or 2 lander you’re hoping to hit within 2-3 draws, so your maximum streak being like six isn’t gonna help you. And since the smoothing will be based on the number of lands you have you’re not gonna get a perfect draw while running eight lands.
It sounds like you are less likely to Light Up The Stage into two lands though.
I don't think that would be true. It sounds more like they're looking at eliminating the extremes, not straight up mana weaving, and having two land next to each other is not an extreme.
I thought there was some deck based matching in unranked play? I'm playing the shitty starter deck unmodified and running up against dudes with mythic board clears...
If they are going to do these things, they should release the algorithms. And if they can be gamed, then they need to be removed. Because people are going to game them.
In other news, I've actually been playing on the ladder again now that nexus is banned and it's been a lot of fun! It's hard to overstate how toxic that deck was.
They could do a lot of things behind the scenes that would fundamentally change the game in terms of shuffling that would be pretty hard to detect. Even the best of two starting hand would be more or less impossible to detect without a tremendous amount of data given what they released. But once you know that it's there, you get the 16 land aggro decks.
That's true, they could do something like ensuring that there are never more than 3 lands in a row or 5 non lands in a row. 4 lands or 6 nonlands in a row are at the far ends of the bell curve so you'd never notice it was there, you'd just have less non games.
But the starting hand algorithm in Bo1 is arguably being abused right now. I don't think we have any actual numbers to go by or any real details of the mechanics.
Here they are comparing a best of 2 hands algorithm, paper magic, and the actual algorithm.
The take away is that no one really knows how it works. We can only speculate that it is benefiting low land aggro decks because that is the conventional wisdom.
That's true, they could do something like ensuring that there are never more than 3 lands in a row or 5 non lands in a row. 4 lands or 6 nonlands in a row are at the far ends of the bell curve so you'd never notice it was there, you'd just have less non games.
But the starting hand algorithm in Bo1 is arguably being abused right now.
4 lands is not on the far end if the curve. In a twenty land deck, that's still over 1%. In a 24 land deck it's like 2.5%
And that's for any given run of four cards. In a 24 land deck you can actually expect there to be a four land run in a pretty large portion of shuffles.
They should be aiming to shave off the more extreme examples. 8 lands in a row in a 24 land deck is 0.06% which is where I'd expect them to start shaving off probabilities.
[note: this is napkin math, with replacement, so not 100% accurate but close enough]
So apparently Mono Blue is the new deck to beat. I know a guy who was holding #1 mythic for a bit was using it but also in 3/4 games I plaayed this morning, my opponents were mono blue. It's a good deck, so keep an eye out for that.
I think I could figure out what they did using the numbers they posted... I could write a script that does the take all probabilities to x power then applies softmax function
Yeah I just ran a couple event sims and of the first 5 deals there was a four land run in 3 of them for a 24 land 60 card deck.
Let's say then there is a 60% chance for a 4 land clump to exist, you now have a 20% chance to see it in a game of magic that sees the first 20 cards of a deck. That's not terribly uncommon at all, but if you had a 3 land chunk instead of 4 land chunk would you ever notice?
Yeah I just ran a couple event sims and of the first 5 deals there was a four land run in 3 of them for a 24 land 60 card deck.
Let's say then there is a 60% chance for a 4 land clump to exist, you now have a 20% chance to see it in a game of magic that sees the first 20 cards of a deck. That's not terribly uncommon at all, but if you had a 3 land chunk instead of 4 land chunk would you ever notice?
You should not mess with probability so much that a 20% chance is ever affected in any significant way.
You should not even mess with probability so much that a 5% chance is ever affected in any significant way. At that point you're just stacking the deck.
It sounds like "the conventional wisdom" could also be anecdotal evidence.
I wouldn't quite go that far, because it's based on the success of 16-17 land decklists vs personal anecdotes. But I don't think anyone understands how it works. It isn't completely baseless speculation but it isn't too far away.
The goal, if they make further changes, should be to eliminate total non-games caused by reasonably built decks getting extremely flooded or screwed. It should not be to make it more likely that typical games of Magic go from slightly awkward to perfect draws.
Posts
That top deck Aurelia to win against the Dino guy was the highlight for sure. Just amazing. Also luminous bonds on the electro static wall for lethal.
Too bad draft didn't go super well but I need to stop going for crazy builds
War of the Spark teaser
mythics flashy, but rare glue
Got it on my first time through with a 5-1 performance from this deck:
9 Mountain (RIX) 195
1 Shivan Fire (DAR) 142
1 Shock (M19) 156
1 Dire Fleet Daredevil (RIX) 99
1 Lava Coil (GRN) 108
1 Lightning Strike (XLN) 149
1 Scorchmark (RNA) 113
1 Captain Lannery Storm (XLN) 136
1 Skewer the Critics (RNA) 115
1 Rekindling Phoenix (RIX) 111
1 Charging Monstrosaur (XLN) 138
1 Skarrgan Hellkite (RNA) 114
1 Etali, Primal Storm (RIX) 100
1 Adventurous Impulse (DAR) 153
11 Forest (RIX) 196
1 Llanowar Elves (DAR) 168
1 Pelt Collector (GRN) 141
1 Kraul Harpooner (GRN) 136
1 Incubation Druid (RNA) 131
1 Rabid Bite (M19) 195
1 Reclamation Sage (M19) 196
1 Thrashing Brontodon (RIX) 148
1 Beast Whisperer (GRN) 123
1 Guardian Project (RNA) 130
1 Goreclaw, Terror of Qal Sisma (M19) 186
1 Nullhide Ferox (GRN) 138
1 Biogenic Ooze (RNA) 122
1 Vivien Reid (M19) 208
1 Carnage Tyrant (XLN) 179
1 Ghalta, Primal Hunger (RIX) 130
1 Rhythm of the Wild (RNA) 201
1 Gruul Spellbreaker (RNA) 179
1 Thrash // Threat (RNA) 229
1 Domri, Chaos Bringer (RNA) 166
1 Ravager Wurm (RNA) 200
1 Frenzied Arynx (RNA) 173
1 Sunder Shaman (RNA) 210
1 Gruul Guildgate (RNA) 250
1 Timber Gorge (M19) 258
1 Stomping Ground (RNA) 259
1 Rootbound Crag (XLN) 256
Nintendo ID: Pastalonius
Smite\LoL:Gremlidin \ WoW & Overwatch & Hots: Gremlidin#1734
3ds: 3282-2248-0453
and we all get planeswalker grave tokens... and Tibalt, because no one would bother to kill him.
I would be sad if Jace died, he is the iconic planswalker to me, but the others are pretty boring. I like the older flawed planeswalkers like Urza and Sorin with cosmic power and petty grudges rather than the more heroic ones we have now.
Maybe if Bolas wins and does something with the planeswalker sparks, they could restrain themselves from printing 3 new planeswalkers every single set too.
Give us Ugin, Vivien Reed and Elspeth trying to use the Eldrazi to stop Phyrexia and Bolas from invading every world. That's why Ugin was so pissed when they killed Ulamog, they act like cosmic vacuums killing anything bigger than a single planeswalker they find between worlds.
Well that sounds like a plan that's not going to backfire horribly. I love it.
Also midstory conflict between Phyrexia and Theros
Loxnic Sobxal
they let you travel between dimensions and call on the hearts of creatures you've formed a bond with or something,
and the user usually fixes or ruins an entire world during every plot arc.
I think this is probably good? I like that they are testing it in the unranked mode first, even though ranked isn't particularly super hardcore or anything at the moment, it's good for future tests. No one likes hitting 8 lands in a row, but they do need to be careful about making things too extreme I think.
Steam ID: Obos Vent: Obos
It's one of those weird things where like
I find lands a really interesting element of Magic, and every game that removes them loses something in the process
but there is literally nothing interesting about dramatic mana flood/screw, and while that's something that's clearly impossible to remove from paper... in digital, it's not.
On the other hand, no one likes being flooded or screwed, so if they can reduce those chances while still keeping what makes things great, it's probably awesome?
Drawing 8 lands in a row in a deck with 40% lands is only a 0.06% (for each series of 8 draws) so I can't imagine that this change will be noticeable. I haven't done the math for how many random ordering of your decks contain a series of 8+ lands but I wouldn't imagine it would be over %1 of the time.
Shame about that alt Duress art though.
Like make sure the land density doesn't deviate too much from average density overall, instead of just in the top 7 cards.
Not sure how this would effect, say, RDW with its low mana base and where it often stops rolling when it hits land pockets.
This is a terrible idea. We already have people playing 16 or 17 land decks in Bo1 to great success. Now this is just going to make them even more likely to get their perfect 1 or 2 land opening hand, *and* not punish them when they mulligan.
Edit: I've been really angry lately, so here's a happy thought: Singleton is super fun when you have a collection. I'm up to 2 Ghalta's now.
This change shouldn’t make a difference in that situation. If you roll the dice on a 1 or 2 lander you’re hoping to hit within 2-3 draws, so your maximum streak being like six isn’t gonna help you. And since the smoothing will be based on the number of lands you have you’re not gonna get a perfect draw while running eight lands.
It sounds like you are less likely to Light Up The Stage into two lands though.
Wait what's this about Ghalta alt arts?
I don't think that would be true. It sounds more like they're looking at eliminating the extremes, not straight up mana weaving, and having two land next to each other is not an extreme.
You get one if you get fine wins in Singleton
In other news, I've actually been playing on the ladder again now that nexus is banned and it's been a lot of fun! It's hard to overstate how toxic that deck was.
They could do a lot of things behind the scenes that would fundamentally change the game in terms of shuffling that would be pretty hard to detect. Even the best of two starting hand would be more or less impossible to detect without a tremendous amount of data given what they released. But once you know that it's there, you get the 16 land aggro decks.
But the starting hand algorithm in Bo1 is arguably being abused right now. I don't think we have any actual numbers to go by or any real details of the mechanics.
There was a post awhile back that says this: https://mtgarena.community.gl/forums/threads/26319?page=1
Here they are comparing a best of 2 hands algorithm, paper magic, and the actual algorithm.
The take away is that no one really knows how it works. We can only speculate that it is benefiting low land aggro decks because that is the conventional wisdom.
4 lands is not on the far end if the curve. In a twenty land deck, that's still over 1%. In a 24 land deck it's like 2.5%
And that's for any given run of four cards. In a 24 land deck you can actually expect there to be a four land run in a pretty large portion of shuffles.
They should be aiming to shave off the more extreme examples. 8 lands in a row in a 24 land deck is 0.06% which is where I'd expect them to start shaving off probabilities.
[note: this is napkin math, with replacement, so not 100% accurate but close enough]
Let's say then there is a 60% chance for a 4 land clump to exist, you now have a 20% chance to see it in a game of magic that sees the first 20 cards of a deck. That's not terribly uncommon at all, but if you had a 3 land chunk instead of 4 land chunk would you ever notice?
You should not mess with probability so much that a 20% chance is ever affected in any significant way.
You should not even mess with probability so much that a 5% chance is ever affected in any significant way. At that point you're just stacking the deck.
I wouldn't quite go that far, because it's based on the success of 16-17 land decklists vs personal anecdotes. But I don't think anyone understands how it works. It isn't completely baseless speculation but it isn't too far away.