Only if you’re lucky. Your expectation – within a small sample – of a better than 5% outcome, when the published chance is 5%, is unjustified.
that’s really strange , if you recorded it pls post it.
It’s probable you made some confusion or you are considering different type of titan packs , in this case gold packs don’t share the timer with normal packs.
2 Likes
Actually pulling 5 legendaries within 100 packs has 69% chance if the initial pity timer legendary hasn’t been obtained yet and 45% chance if it has.
You mean the first 10 packs opened of a given set? (I wouldn’t call that a “pity timer” legendary.) Sure, that skews things a bit for the first 100 packs, but in the following context, I don’t think I was wrong; Remylebeau seems to be expecting a better than 5% outcome overall:
If the pity timer legend has already been obtained prior, then that’s the 45% chance I mentioned (5 legendaries in 100 packs). Just out of curiosity, where did you get 5% from?
Oh, the chance of getting 1 legend in 1 pack. Expecting to get 5 legends in 100 packs is quite different from expecting to get 1 legend in 1 pack though.
I was talking about setting expectations. If the chance per pack is 5%, should you expect “at least” 5 legendaries per 100 packs, or about 5 legendaries per 100 packs? (Where “about” may mean 3, and may mean 7.)
1 Like
I mean is this an actual discussion? People complain about packs bc they get unlucky. People complain about rng cards bc they get unlucky. People complain about specific cards bc they lost to it once. It’s just the mentality of gamers to immediately complain about something specific if it doesn’t go their way every once in a while.
Are you assuming a linear increase in the drop chance from 0% to 100% over the 40 packs? Because that’s not how it works. The drop rate is actually less than 5% for most of the pity timer and then increases exponentially starting somewhere around the 30-35 pack mark (we don’t know exactly where obviously). This means that while the MEAN number of packs between Legendaries remains at 20 packs, the MEDIAN number of packs between Legendaries is significantly higher. And that’s what I think Blizzard should adjust in their programming, i.e. make the MEDIAN closer to the MEAN.
yeah , is worst than that , based on old data pack 37th is a bit more than 25% and pack 38th is over 50%.
So the big increase is only on last 3 packs.
1 Like
Hi, I’m a gold level player. I’m curious, what makes you think Hearthstone company has been putting bots in the game? Bots really bother me–I hate them. Thanks for the info
OMG this thread is sooo entertaining!
They are not putting bots in the games. They try to remove the bots from the game.
I think it’s valid to think the chance of getting a legendary is too low. I think it is too.
Except that is NOT what it is unless you are lucky.
You have to start counting after your first legendary they give you within the first 10 packs.
Yes I know that is what it is. Why else would I be complaining?
Not expecting it now, but yes, that is the change that should be implemented.
That’s easy to say when you aren’t screwed over easily half the time since open beta, and things get noticeably worse for pack openings after going F2P.
It’s a well known phenomenon at this point, although I haven’t noticed any lately. You can usually tell based on the name and there being no waiting for them to play or end turn.
thats been my average for years
My point exactly. You have to be “lucky” just to get what should be average.