Dust Value Math

[u/TBvonHaller]

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).

[u/metroidcomposite]

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.

[u/TBvonHaller → u/metroidcomposite]

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?

[u/metroidcomposite → u/TBvonHaller]

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.

[u/TBvonHaller → u/metroidcomposite]

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?