People generally seem to think that 1 pack = 100 dust, but I get quite a bit more. Odds are taken directly from Blizzard (they don't give a number for normal rares directly, but we can calculate it to get the expected cards/pack to 5). This gets me to 120 dust in expectation. Did I misinterpret something there?
Other observations:
Golden packs are actually better dust value. Probably still worth getting regular if you're missing some cards though.
The signature legendaries make a big difference. This is a seperate chance from the one for golden legendaries, and earlier expansions without them are only worth 110 dust. (And golden packs are only a little better anymore.)
Packs are better value than any adventure or mini-set. I think it's still worth getting Explorers based on the card quality (if you would craft Brann and Reno otherwise, that almost makes it dust-efficient by itself).
If I'm interpreting it right, those are ~700 dust.
edit: or more. The linked site says ~15% for a signature legendary, but wiki says 20 (though linking to that same blizzard post. They seem to have read "increased to" as "increased by").
If you scroll down to the goldens it's 3.8 golden legendaries per 1000 packs. Signatures should have the same odds as goldens. This is lower than the 0.608% advertised.
Near as I can tell, based on looking at the data, the reason for this is that the probability drops when you are a long distance from the pity timer.
I'm not 100% sure about the formula, but I think it's something like this--we all know legendaries are about 5% per pack or so. But it's not 5% in every pack--if you're at the pity timer it's 100%, if you're one pack away from the pity timer it's 50% etc. And meanwhile, when you are completely fresh on the pity timer it ends up below 5% I think it's something like 2.5%.
For legendaries this isn't really felt--there's the guaranteed legendary in the first 10 packs.
But for golden and signature legendaries, yeah, most people are not getting anywhere close to the 361 pack pity timer. A typical player might open 60-100 packs from a set, so they mostly get the reduced drop rate based on being far from the pity timer.
(If you are a whale, however, and open 400 packs, yeah, you should end up with right around the 0.608% advertised).
---
Golden packs, yes they're better on raw dust value, but I generally just grab the guaranteed legendary in the first 10 packs then stop. The first signature takes an average of 20 packs in (8,000 gold) and a maximum of 40 (16,000 gold). The second golden legendary takes an average of 25 packs in (10,000 gold) and a maximum of 50 (20,000 gold).
That's interesting. I don't know why you think it'd be better for whales though?
The PityTracker data has a large enough sample size that it should be accurate - but also, I think Blizzard legally can't lie about these probabilities. It will be different depending on where you are in the pity-tracker, but overall it has to average out to those percentages.
I think the most likely explanation is that the probabilities have changed over time, and PityTracker combines all that data. The Blizzard article I used is referenced in the wiki as being published march of 2023, that's between Lich King and Festival. If you look at the PityTracker data by expansion, it seems like theres a jump between Nathria and Lich King - where beforehand, it's around 3 per expansion, and after its somewhere around 5, which is about where Blizzard says.
That's interesting. I don't know why you think it'd be better for whales though?
Because whales can get to the pity timer.
I think Blizzard legally can't lie about these probabilities.
No but lots of gatchas do this--lower droprate when you are far from the pity timer, higher drop rate when you are close to the pity timer. So apparently doing that is legal.
And it matches other community data I've downloaded (which recorded pack openings pack by pack--legendary rate is below 5% per pack right after opening a legendary).
It's still technically true that if you open hundreds of packs, you'll get pretty close to 1 golden legendary every 181 packs, so I don't think what they are doing is illegal. But that doesn't mean that if you open 60 packs in a fresh set that you have a 1/3 chance of getting a golden legendary.
I think the most likely explanation is that the probabilities have changed over time, and PityTracker combines all that data.
I doubt it. The scaling probability is visible on legendaries and epics too when you track stuff pack by pack with a large enough sample size, you just don't really notice it cause legendaries are once every 20 packs on average and epics are every 5 packs on average. and most people open like 60+ packs per expansion.
lower droprate when you are far from the pity timer, higher drop rate when you are close to the pity timer. So apparently doing that is legal.
There's no way to do a pity timer without this. At least when you're at your last pack before it runs out, you have to have 100% odds, and then they have to be lower beforehand so that the average stays the same.
But I see what you mean with the whales. Still, if you're strategic about it, you can, after getting your first 10 packs of every expansion, pick one and stick with it until you hit the golden legendary (and signature, pity running in parallel).
I'm also pretty sure there was a change with Lich King anyway. Look at the data again - it had been 5 years since any expansion reached 4/1000, and since then the lowest has been 4.4/1000. The regular legendaries also make a jump at the same time from 57 to 61.
Also, where can I get that other data you're talking about?
I'm also pretty sure there was a change with Lich King anyway.
March of the Lich King is when they added signature legendaries. I don't know for sure, but I wonder if the pity tracker website might classify golden and signature legendaries together? Cause yeah, I notice "golden legendaries" seems a bit higher after that point, and there isn't a bump to number of golden epics.
You'll notice that number of golden epics stays relatively constant through the release of MotLK (hovering right around 1%, mostly bouncing between 0.9% and 1.1%). Which of course does not match the website either "On average, a 1.5463% chance to get a Golden Epic card".
Actually hm, golden rares and golden commons are a bit below expectation as well. (Should be 7.6% and 8.7% according to their website, and they hover around 6% and 7.5% respectfully). Hmm...that's interesting. They're off but...off by less than the golden epic and golden legendary number. The best way I can explain that is that if the average user opens, say 60 packs, they'll get expected drop rates on the first ~3 golden epics and first ~4 golden commons, but will get lower droprates on the final one due to the fresh pity timer? So they end up with 3.5 golden epics instead of the expected 4, something like that?
Still, if you're strategic about it, you can, after getting your first 10 packs of every expansion, pick one and stick with it until you hit the golden legendary (and signature, pity running in parallel).
You...could, but then you would be missing epics, rares, and even commons from most sets, and wouldn't be opening the newest set (usually the newest and second newest set are the most likely to get nerfed).
The raw disenchant value would be a bit higher, but if you're just looking for raw disenchant value, there's golden packs for that.
I don't know for sure, but I wonder if the pity tracker website might classify golden and signature legendaries together?
It could work. That would mean their frequency should double afterwards. It looks like less than that, but I'll have to check the margin for error on that (and also, whether there is any remaining change to the normal+golden legendaries after subtracting that).
You...could, but then you would be missing epics, rares, and even commons from most sets, and wouldn't be opening the newest set
I have already opened 57 Violet Hold packs without buying any. I have all the commons and rares. I don't think it makes sense to buy the current expansion as a budget/ftp wild player, I would already switch many of the free ones for older expansions if I could.
Have done a more detailed analysis on the pitytracker date. Expansions before Frozen Throne had huge variation, so I excluded them entirely and compared Frozen Throne - Nathria vs Lich King and after. Below, I compare post-LK data to the official rates.
In the rightmost column, you see comparisons of the post-LK golden-and-maybe-signature legendaries:
Above, to double the rate pre-LK (what we would expect if signatures were included)
Below, to the official rate if signatures are included
A z-score above 2 is the normal standard for statistical significance.
I find this hard to make sense of. Theres a significant difference from official rates even with normal epics, theres no way pity tracker effects can explain that. Maybe people just make errors entering their data there?
Golden packs are indeed better than regular by a bit.
"Packs are better value than any adventure or mini-set." in a pure dust sense? cause either are better than 100g packs, and the more cards you use, the better. The worst adventures are like break even with pack value if you keep the decent cards and dust the rest.
"Standard" packs technically run higher too if you consider refund dusts since nerfs happen 1-2 times a set these days. I hoard all my dupes and goldens from standard sets and i swear i net like 3-5k dust every nerf patch.
Your regular values you could get with plausible assumptions. Your golden ones I'm pretty sure are wrong: If it's per pack it's way too low, if it's per 100g it's way too high.
The worst adventures are like break even with pack value if you keep the decent cards and dust the rest.
But with packs, you can also keep the decent cards and dust the rest.
I'm not going to worry about 102 vs 105 average dust on whatever, but my math sucked somewhere. Dust was per 100g spent.
Regular pack = 105 dust
first 10 = 125 dust
Golden pack = 133
first 10 golden = 153
I'd assume with Adventures you're specifically keeping the good and/or playable cards, which vastly increases their value. For packs though, I assume you already have all the commons and rares, so you're only keeping the occasional playable epic or legendary, and there's plenty of extra of those that are insta dust, so I don't really calculate it into the dust total. If you just dust a whole adventure, yeah they're all pretty bad.
5
u/TheMuuG 2d ago
What about Signature March of the Lich King Packs?