you only need 6 ball lightening from the fractal instead of 6
6
the number of the beast
no idea of the chances to always draw a pends with only 4 but is probably low, u need to drop the sob it has already too much skips, if u even lose for not drawing a pend it's terrible
Ooooh, teacher call on me! *raises hand
I might know that probability:
First, your initial draw of 8 cards (presumes going 2nd, the going 1st probability will be very similar) in a 30-card deck with 4 pends you want to draw at least 1x:
So, 73% of the time you get an opening hand pendulum.
Next, we consider the mulligan which the game silently does in the background. The Ball Lightning is going to factor into the mulligan, so at 30-card deck drawing 8-cards with 5-zerocost cards it is about 18% of the initial draws lacking a zerocost resulting in mulligan:
So, ~18% of your initial draws you get to invisibly mulligan-draw...
That would be the 22-card deck stack drawing 8-cards with 4 pendulum targets in the stack wanting at least 1x:
So, about 86% of the instances of the initial draw not having a pend, your mulligan draw will have a pendulum in it (at least one).
The arithmetic part:
.733 + .863 * .185 = .733 (initial draw with >= 1 pend) + .160 (mulligan re-draw has >= 1 pend) = .893 <-- 89.3% of your first hands you see in-game (initial plus the invisible silent mulligan) will yield at least one pendulum, or more.
That's not too shabby in my book (presuming the math was correct) - 1 time in 10 games you get a faildraw (note: I have not worked up any numbers related to how often the faildraw is due to Ball Lightning-only-zerocost vs. actually having no zerocost in resulting hand).
/one-is-glad-to-be-of-service
EDIT1: Well, ignoring that Ball Lightning is a zero-cost mulligan screwer means the first calc I posted is not right.
EDIT2: Alright, should be fixed now! :-)
