Good point on the fixed distribution model, reminds me of a beef I had for a while, as it almost seems paradoxical when comparing the Trading Card Game (yay! more choice!) model vs the Collectible Card Game (duh dull same old) :
1) having a lot of randomness (TCG) seems to dull the diversity of actual gameplay while enhancing the value (monetary) of particular cards needed for specific combos, thus justifying the need of further expansions to deal with the stratified, stale and sterile supremacy of certain decks and maintaining interest in the whole game with frequent iterations; i.e. flooding the senses by a stunning seizure-inducing display of semblance of diversity of elements of gameplay.
2) --- then CCG has a fixed set with 0 randomness, but encourages experimentation with shared gameplay mechanics and resources -> less variance, more strategy, in general. The challenge is not obtaining the top tier cards, but understanding the entrails of the game system and playing with 'em. At least when not just grabbing premade (possibly brokenly OP) decks on the net... then again powerplayin' will most certainly make you miss on all the flavorful interactions and roleplaying possibilities offered by the setting (Doomtown/Deadlands offers a lot of that).
TLDR: Raw power vs flexibility, ye olde dilemma. Also: having fun vs winning.
Pretty much the difference between Texas Holdem and Omaha (excitability vs stability)... or, at the very extreme, pay 2 win vs pay 4 bling, especially if you don't design your own deck and only google the optimum stuff