Messages

[Basic lands:]

I just posted a large update to the drafting packs in Lackey. I fixed and improved accuracy in many of the existing packs (like packs that had 11 commons but should have had 10, the DFC slot in Innistrad sets, etc.) and I believe all special collation rules should be working. I will continue to check and update.

Notes:

Basic lands: Most real-world booster packs come with a basic land. I've omitted this slot, since it's not drafted. Return to Ravnica block, Guilds of Ravnica, and the first two Tarkir sets instead use the basic land slot for dual lands; I've included these. There is a chance the land in a pack of Unstable will be a Steamflogger Boss, which IS part of the draft. I've implemented this. So in Lackey, an Unstable pack will usually be 14 cards, but will occasionally be 15.

Battlebond: In a real pack, if you get one partner, you will always get the other. (A rare or mythic partner replaces one of the uncommons.) Unfortunately, due to Lackey's inability to understand decimal probabilities, I am unable to replicate this in a nice, WYSIWYG manner. Instead, if you get a partner, the other is represented by an empty slot. You'll have to add it manually to your deck. I know this is inconvenient, but unless Trevor updates Lackey's pack math, I can't do it the right way.

Dominaria: Every Dominaria pack will successfully give you at least one legendary, in a way which seems reasonably close to results in real packs.

I saw in this post from 2011 that chance probabilities in pack definitions currently supported integers only, but that Trevor was changing it at the time.

I don't know how much good it does to mention it here, but probabilities with a decimal component break the pack loader and make it always select the first chance. I encountered this bug while improving and adding to the Magic plugin's pack definitions, and it's going to make things... tricky.

Getting a weird bug where some cards appear roughly 33% bigger than other cards. Not sure what's up.

Any idea?

For a while there, the plugin used larger images from Scryfall. It's likely the larger cards you're seeing are still saved from then. Can you try deleting (or just renaming) your [Lackey folder]/plugins/magic/sets/setimages/ folder, so it downloads current images? If it still persists after doing that, let me know.

Crap! Man, I found that bug myself and thought I'd fixed it, but apparently I saved the fixed file and then neglected to upload it.

Thank you so much for bringing it to my attention. It should be the correct file now.

I'm still working on getting them working as well as I'd like, but I've posted an update for right now that should be better than nothing.

There's not yet any custom collation, for Battlebond partners or for Dominaria legendary requirements. Guilds of Ravnica doesn't have Guildgates yet.

I also need to fix problems in older packs. Looks like almost every standard booster comes with eleven commons instead of ten. The new ones have the correct number. (I assume no one needs the basic land.)

I know they're not in packs yet. From your message, I worried that they weren't even showing up in the deck editor.

It was bugging me that it was off-center. I also made the levels a little more consistent.

Okay so I might have gotten a little carried away here, but I think a border also really helps you know which way to go.

Yes. For example:

Code Select Expand

<pack>
<packtitle>Core Set 2019 Booster</packtitle>
<packkind>Booster</packkind>
<packcommoncrit><field>Set</field><eval>IS</eval><data>m19</data></packcommoncrit>
<packcommoncrit><field>Number</field><eval>ISLESSTHAN</eval><data>281</data></packcommoncrit>
<chance>
<prob>87</prob>
<kind><qty>1</qty><crit><field>Rarity</field><eval>IS</eval><data>R</data></crit></kind>
<kind><qty>3</qty><crit><field>Rarity</field><eval>IS</eval><data>U</data></crit></kind>
<kind><qty>11</qty><crit><field>Rarity</field><eval>IS</eval><data>C</data></crit></kind>
</chance>
<chance>
<prob>13</prob>
<kind><qty>1</qty><crit><field>Rarity</field><eval>IS</eval><data>M</data></crit></kind>
<kind><qty>3</qty><crit><field>Rarity</field><eval>IS</eval><data>U</data></crit></kind>
<kind><qty>11</qty><crit><field>Rarity</field><eval>IS</eval><data>C</data></crit></kind>
</chance>
</pack>

I think the idea basically works, but it would be a lot clearer with some graphical element helping your eye navigate the switchbacks. Maybe something like this?

Thanks for the offer! If you figure anything out, I'd much appreciate it. The pack definitions are the last bit of this plugin for me to figure out and update/rework.

It's just a pack to be drafted.

Recent Magic sets have extra cards above the max collector number. They're technically in the set, but they're only available in the planeswalker decks rather than in packs.

Previous pack definitions in Lackey have simply listed each individual card to be excluded, like so:

Code Select Expand

<packcommoncrit><field>Name</field><eval>DOESNTCONTAIN</eval><data>Jace, Ingenious Mind-Mage</data></packcommoncrit>
<packcommoncrit><field>Name</field><eval>DOESNTCONTAIN</eval><data>Castaway's Despair</data></packcommoncrit>
[...]

But it would be a lot simpler if I could simply exclude cards above a certain number. (The Magic plugin doesn't currently have a "number" field, but I could easily add one, and have done so for the test build in which I'm trying this.)

Just an update... I am chipping away at the pack definitions, both fixing the existing ones and adding new ones. Apparently pretty much all of them have 11 commons, instead of 10 commons and a basic land? I guess no one ever fixed that before.

According to the tutorial, a crit or commoncrit in a pack definition "can be IS, CONTAINS, DOESNTCONTAIN,ISGREATERTHAN, among others."

One would hope that "ISLESSTHAN" is included in that mysterious "among others". I want to exclude some cards from a pack definition, but this results in a completely empty pack:

Code Select Expand

<packcommoncrit><field>Number</field><eval>ISLESSTHAN</eval><data>260</data></packcommoncrit>

To troubleshoot, I tried this, which also produced zero cards:

Code Select Expand

<packcommoncrit><field>Number</field><eval>ISGREATERTHAN</eval><data>5</data></packcommoncrit>

Trying "DOESNTCONTAIN" returns cards just fine. Has anyone else had any luck with these?

I hope you mean in packs--let me know if those sets aren't showing up for you.

The good news is, I think I can replicate Battlebond's custom collation that ensures you always get partners together. Unfortunately I don't think I can do the "always one legendary" for Dominaria.