PDA

View Full Version : PSA: Your Gold Just Jumped in Value



BlindMan
05-09-2015, 11:06 AM
For any free-to-play players and anyone else with a lot more gold than platinum, now is your time to trade up. The impending removal of the AA commons from the store has created a huge demand for gold. That means gold pack prices are way down and AA common plat prices are way up. Players are also buying gold directly at much better exchange rates than before.

If you have a lot of gold and you want to trade up for packs or platinum so you can draft or build decks, do it now!

Side note: Anyone who would rather I not tell people so you can milk the market, just try and flood it. I would bet that it won't return to "normal" until the AA's are pulled from the store.

darkwonders
05-09-2015, 11:15 AM
Shhh! Don't let the peasants know! I need my platinum to remain valuable! I don't have time to farm the AA commons!

katkillad
05-09-2015, 04:36 PM
It's getting to the point where I really wish they would consider lowering the cost of rolling chests, 240 plat just to roll a legendary chest is kind of absurd. Don't get me wrong, I'm glad gold has value. It's just getting to the point where it's so valuable I don't want to roll chests at all anymore and that kind of defeats the purpose as a gold sink.

darkwonders
05-09-2015, 04:46 PM
It's getting to the point where I really wish they would consider lowering the cost of rolling chests, 240 plat just to roll a legendary chest is kind of absurd. Don't get me wrong, I'm glad gold has value. It's just getting to the point where it's so valuable I don't want to roll chests at all anymore and that kind of defeats the purpose as a gold sink.

Gold is supposedly one of the items in a chest, so who knows how it'll fluctuate once we can open the damn things XD

magic_gazz
05-09-2015, 05:01 PM
If there is gold in chests then it would be nice if we could open them before they remove the AA cards.

I say this though as I have a lot of chests, 0 gold and really do not enjoy grinding arena. These AA cards require a lot of grinding and it is really not fun at all.

Before anyone says I could buy them for plat, they are currently almost 300 plat each. That's a lot of money for a common.

Xenavire
05-09-2015, 05:29 PM
If there is gold in chests then it would be nice if we could open them before they remove the AA cards.

I say this though as I have a lot of chests, 0 gold and really do not enjoy grinding arena. These AA cards require a lot of grinding and it is really not fun at all.

Before anyone says I could buy them for plat, they are currently almost 300 plat each. That's a lot of money for a common.

Well, they were selling for about 170-180 a few days ago. The announcement (rightfully) caused a spike. Will it stay that way? Quite probably, but not necessarily. After all, Gold is an infinite resource, so to speak, so the market could become totally saturated if the lure of plat drives people to farm arena.

And I highly doubt that we will be able to open chests before the AA's rotate - I suspect they will happen on the same day. Having those AA's be replaced with set 3 commons seems likely, or at least some kind of set 2 commons (which could drive some interest in old cards, which doesn't hurt.)

dogmod
05-09-2015, 10:56 PM
The current plat to gold ratio makes it very easy for PvE players to get cards.. it also highlights that apparently the number of f2p players to not f2p players is insufficient to meet the current gold demands of the PvP players at a reasonable conversion ratio. Not sure if that is good for the game or not good for the game. I do know it is rather annoying as I try to get my playset of these guys.

PureVapes
05-10-2015, 07:27 AM
I think the 'reasonable' rate is just not as high as most PvP players would like, especially after being spoiled by the tournament rewards handing out loads of gold for free. To keep F2P players interested and convert some of them into long term, paying players, 150:1 is likely not enough incentive for new players to stick around and keep producing gold. CZE probably wants the ratio to be closer to 100:1 or less and it's finally around there.

It's a fair point that we don't have enough of a gold generation population at the moment, but that can easily change with some marketing.

Mahes
05-10-2015, 10:30 AM
I have a quick question. When Set 3 comes out will the draft format be 1 pack from each set, or only 3 packs of set 3?

Gwaer
05-10-2015, 10:44 AM
3 of set 3. Set 3 starts block 2.

darkwonders
05-10-2015, 11:02 AM
If there is gold in chests then it would be nice if we could open them before they remove the AA cards.

I say this though as I have a lot of chests, 0 gold and really do not enjoy grinding arena. These AA cards require a lot of grinding and it is really not fun at all.

Before anyone says I could buy them for plat, they are currently almost 300 plat each. That's a lot of money for a common.

AA CMK's go for $70-$80. And they're just a rare. AA's will always go for as much as someone is willing to buy.

dogmod
05-10-2015, 11:29 AM
I think the 'reasonable' rate is just not as high as most PvP players would like, especially after being spoiled by the tournament rewards handing out loads of gold for free. To keep F2P players interested and convert some of them into long term, paying players, 150:1 is likely not enough incentive for new players to stick around and keep producing gold. CZE probably wants the ratio to be closer to 100:1 or less and it's finally around there.

It's a fair point that we don't have enough of a gold generation population at the moment, but that can easily change with some marketing.

I define reasonable as compared to other f2p games. Currently Hex has one of the best "hourly wages" of any f2p game ever. In that sense I find the conversion rate unreasonable.

Mahes
05-10-2015, 11:33 AM
3 of set 3. Set 3 starts block 2.

So based on that information, would you think the price for Set 1 and 2 packs will plummet plat value wise when Set 3 comes out? If they are no longer used in a draft format, then their value will be relegated to the value of the individual cards. That being said, the individual cards might actually increase in value in some cases as they will no longer be market heavy through draft.

It will be very interesting too see how far down in value packs go when they can no longer be used in a draft or sealed.

Gwaer
05-10-2015, 11:39 AM
It's hard to say. I expect sets 1 and 2 to go down in value, and then slowly build back up again. But there's honestly no telling what's going to happen.

I believe they plan to make a 2-2-1 queue available for drafting even after set 3 makes the most current format 3-3-3. Don't know if it will be available all the time, or just during certain hours, or if it will rotate, or maybe it won't be open until 3-3-3 has been live for a couple of weeks. *shrug* I hope they open up a 1-1-1 queue sometimes in the future, and even a 1-1-2, or 2-1-2, 1-2-2 etc. I'd like to see special drafts with non standard rules be a regular occurrence.

poizonous
05-10-2015, 12:32 PM
AA CMK's go for $70-$80. And they're just a rare. AA's will always go for as much as someone is willing to buy.

Hard to compare the price of AA Commons sold for gold, compared to AA Collector Tier cards. Rarity of Collector tier card's have 0 effect on their price. Once there are even more F2P players, the game will have even more AA commons circulating, lowering their prices. The amount of Collector Tier cards can only drop as people with Collector Tier Perks stops playing the game, causing the supply of the cards available to go up higher in price

Mahes
05-10-2015, 12:34 PM
It's hard to say. I expect sets 1 and 2 to go down in value, and then slowly build back up again. But there's honestly no telling what's going to happen.

I believe they plan to make a 2-2-1 queue available for drafting even after set 3 makes the most current format 3-3-3. Don't know if it will be available all the time, or just during certain hours, or if it will rotate, or maybe it won't be open until 3-3-3 has been live for a couple of weeks. *shrug* I hope they open up a 1-1-1 queue sometimes in the future, and even a 1-1-2, or 2-1-2, 1-2-2 etc. I'd like to see special drafts with non standard rules be a regular occurrence.

No real point in opening those ques for a long time. It just splits the current population and most will want to do 333 anyways given how many do not like the current 221 format. I am hoping set 3 is akin to set one in how it is balanced.

Xenavire
05-10-2015, 12:36 PM
No real point in opening those ques for a long time. It just splits the current population and most will want to do 333 anyways given how many do not like the current 221 format. I am hoping set 3 is akin to set one in how it is balanced.

Well, what we know so far is it is tribal, and most likely smaller than set 1. It could honestly go either way, but set 2 was small and very tribal, so my gut says it is going to be very tribal - I do like Shift as a wildcard to open everything up though.

katkillad
05-10-2015, 02:47 PM
I think the 'reasonable' rate is just not as high as most PvP players would like, especially after being spoiled by the tournament rewards handing out loads of gold for free. To keep F2P players interested and convert some of them into long term, paying players, 150:1 is likely not enough incentive for new players to stick around and keep producing gold. CZE probably wants the ratio to be closer to 100:1 or less and it's finally around there.

It's a fair point that we don't have enough of a gold generation population at the moment, but that can easily change with some marketing.

What you are suggesting doesn't really make sense to what you are claiming. It's already 120-130:1, having a larger gold generating population means that ratio will increase and not get closer to the 100:1 you claim is a target. Gold is worth as much as it is right now because arena is the only place to get it, it's time consuming to run arena and the demand for gold is putting heavy pressure on supply.

100:1 would mean it would cost 300 plat to roll a legendary chest. If I'm going to spend 2-3$ on a slot machine/chest roll then I'd rather buy a lottery ticket in real life. I really doubt they intended on chest rolling to get this expensive, it went from a fun bonus to an expensive gold sink.

Yoss
05-10-2015, 03:53 PM
100:1 would mean it would cost 300 plat to roll a legendary chest. If I'm going to spend 2-3$ on a slot machine/chest roll then I'd rather buy a lottery ticket in real life. I really doubt they intended on chest rolling to get this expensive, it went from a fun bonus to an expensive gold sink.

What you see as a problem, I see as the system working perfectly. If you don't think it's worth rolling the fat chests, trade them away to others who think differently. I think it's fantastic that the gold sinks are working so well, and it's not because I'm a gold farmer. (I've only run Arena maybe 20 times total so far.)

selpai
05-10-2015, 03:57 PM
It's getting to the point where I really wish they would consider lowering the cost of rolling chests, 240 plat just to roll a legendary chest is kind of absurd. Don't get me wrong, I'm glad gold has value. It's just getting to the point where it's so valuable I don't want to roll chests at all anymore and that kind of defeats the purpose as a gold sink.

Yeah, i just want to see gold rewards from chests changed to be 50% of the cost to roll the chest. So instead of getting like 500 gold back for rolling an 8.5k chest, you got 4.2k. I really don't see any other changes needed.

Rycajo
05-10-2015, 04:11 PM
Yeah, i just want to see gold rewards from chests changed to be 50% of the cost to roll the chest. So instead of getting like 500 gold back for rolling an 8.5k chest, you got 4.2k. I really don't see any other changes needed.

The gold rewards from rolling are very lackluster right now. A single gold icon gives you 500 gold, which is a fraction of the cost to roll even a common chest. If I'm "winning" something from the roll, I want to feel like I've won something. Right now that result makes me feel like a loser - just not quite as big of a loser as no reward given.

Edit: As far as the Common AA cards jumping gold value, I think the current situation is just about perfect. These AA cards are definitely not required to play the game. They do nothing but change an image on some good, cheap cards. If I was a free-to-play player, I would hope Hex can keep up the perfect balance of AA offerings (right quantity/quality) in order to maximize the value of PvE earnings.

Xenavire
05-10-2015, 04:21 PM
Yeah, i just want to see gold rewards from chests changed to be 50% of the cost to roll the chest. So instead of getting like 500 gold back for rolling an 8.5k chest, you got 4.2k. I really don't see any other changes needed.

The RNG on red rolls needs to be less punishing too. I would happily give up the pack just to have a fair shot at getting the other rewards.

Yoss
05-10-2015, 08:52 PM
"fair shot" is a rather strange term to use in that context.

Tension
05-11-2015, 02:54 AM
3 of set 3. Set 3 starts block 2.

Is the Constructed Card Pool going to be made up just of set 3 as well? If so, is there another format that will include all of the current cards?

Xenavire
05-11-2015, 03:00 AM
"fair shot" is a rather strange term to use in that context.

Not at all - I have zero use for more boosters at this point, but I still haven't rolled either red roll sleeve after hundreds of rolls (most likely over 1k total rolls.) I would sacrifice the ability to get packs from the wheels if it would make 3x red comparable to 3x gold in terms of roll rarity.

Mahes
05-11-2015, 05:10 AM
Is the Constructed Card Pool going to be made up just of set 3 as well? If so, is there another format that will include all of the current cards?

I am pretty sure constructed still can use cards from all 3 sets. That will not become a possible issue until Set 7 or maybe Set 5.

darkwonders
05-11-2015, 06:10 AM
And gold value continues to rise. Now 102:1 at hexprice.com

Yoss
05-11-2015, 08:23 AM
Not at all - I have zero use for more boosters at this point, but I still haven't rolled either red roll sleeve after hundreds of rolls (most likely over 1k total rolls.) I would sacrifice the ability to get packs from the wheels if it would make 3x red comparable to 3x gold in terms of roll rarity.

I'm still not seeing how "fair shot" applies. The wheels are completely "fair" in giving the same random chance to you as to anyone else. You can complain about "bad luck" if you like, but the system is definitely "fair". To me it sounds like you're complaining about the rarity of a particular result, not about an imbalance in "fairness". If the drop rate is 1 in a billion for something, you may hate it, but it's still fair (it doesn't favor one player's spin over another).

Xenavire
05-11-2015, 08:52 AM
I'm still not seeing how "fair shot" applies. The wheels are completely "fair" in giving the same random chance to you as to anyone else. You can complain about "bad luck" if you like, but the system is definitely "fair". To me it sounds like you're complaining about the rarity of a particular result, not about an imbalance in "fairness". If the drop rate is 1 in a billion for something, you may hate it, but it's still fair (it doesn't favor one player's spin over another).

I don't mean a fair shot in relation to everyone else, I mean a fair shot in relation to the other rarities. The booster is forcing the rarity of red rolls to be higher than it needs to be, and I would much rather a more balanced system with less overall rewards.

I get gold rolls on a fairly regular basis, but red rolls? I have so few of them in total. It just doesn't sit right with me (especially when the red rolls represent lower 'rarity' items in every single slot.)

I mean, I can't reconcile the fact that I have both gold sleeves but neither red sleeve, had to trade for all 4 shiitake chefs, multiple water elementals, scraptech brawlers, and veteran gladiators, yet had 6x wrathwood, 4x air elemental, 2x fungal monstrosities, and an azurefate. That is more than 15 gold rolls, no problem, and I have had perhaps half that in red rolls, total.

And yes, I am well aware of the fact that my red rolls probably came out ahead in value, but that is because of the skewed droprates and the bonus booster packs more than anything else.

hex_colin
05-11-2015, 08:57 AM
I don't mean a fair shot in relation to everyone else, I mean a fair shot in relation to the other rarities. The booster is forcing the rarity of red rolls to be higher than it needs to be, and I would much rather a more balanced system with less overall rewards.

I get gold rolls on a fairly regular basis, but red rolls? I have so few of them in total. It just doesn't sit right with me (especially when the red rolls represent lower 'rarity' items in every single slot.)

I mean, I can't reconcile the fact that I have both gold sleeves but neither red sleeve, had to trade for all 4 shiitake chefs, multiple water elementals, scraptech brawlers, and veteran gladiators, yet had 6x wrathwood, 4x air elemental, 2x fungal monstrosities, and an azurefate. That is more than 15 gold rolls, no problem, and I have had perhaps half that in red rolls, total.

And yes, I am well aware of the fact that my red rolls probably came out ahead in value, but that is because of the skewed droprates and the bonus booster packs more than anything else.

The rates of Red and Gold results are pretty low. Guaranteed you haven't rolled near enough chests to get any sort of statistically significant results.

Xenavire
05-11-2015, 10:10 AM
The rates of Red and Gold results are pretty low. Guaranteed you haven't rolled near enough chests to get any sort of statistically significant results.

Probably not, but ~1k rolls is still enough to feel really bad. And it is definitely enough to notice that red rolls are most definitely not more common than gold rolls, which I feel (and always have felt) they should be.

Svenn
05-11-2015, 10:10 AM
The rates of Red and Gold results are pretty low. Guaranteed you haven't rolled near enough chests to get any sort of statistically significant results.

No kidding. I'm still waiting on my Wrathwood sleeves at like 5-600 Set 1 chests spun. :(

Thrawn
05-11-2015, 10:44 AM
Probably not, but ~1k rolls is still enough to feel really bad. And it is definitely enough to notice that red rolls are most definitely not more common than gold rolls, which I feel (and always have felt) they should be.

1k rolls is probably more than enough to give significant data within a few % of accurate. Although when you're talking drop rates that I'm guessing are 1% and lower a few % becomes pretty significant.

katkillad
05-11-2015, 05:38 PM
What you see as a problem, I see as the system working perfectly. If you don't think it's worth rolling the fat chests, trade them away to others who think differently. I think it's fantastic that the gold sinks are working so well, and it's not because I'm a gold farmer. (I've only run Arena maybe 20 times total so far.)

Is it worth 1.5 packs to roll a legendary chest? I think the prices are fair for the common AA's and I'm glad gold has value, it's just that over time the cost to roll chests has not scaled well with the substantial increase in gold value and it's becoming a prohibitive gold sink rather than what it was once before gold more than doubled in value.

hex_colin
05-11-2015, 05:49 PM
Probably not, but ~1k rolls is still enough to feel really bad. And it is definitely enough to notice that red rolls are most definitely not more common than gold rolls, which I feel (and always have felt) they should be.

It's not really. Let's say they both had a 1% chance of happening. If you'd seen 13 Gold results and 7 Red results (and you had remembered the results of 1000 accurately without any biases) you'd probably feel the way you do. But you'd still be a couple of thousand rolls away from being able to make a statistically significant commentary on the expected rate of Red or Gold results.

hex_colin
05-11-2015, 05:51 PM
Is it worth 1.5 packs to roll a legendary chest? I think the prices are fair for the common AA's and I'm glad gold has value, it's just that over time the cost to roll chests has not scaled well with the substantial increase in gold value and it's becoming a prohibitive gold sink rather than what it was once before gold more than doubled in value.

It might be. What if there is an AA in there that only comes from Primal Chests? What is you're guaranteed to get the Vampire King sleeves from a Primal Chest? Both of those things would sell for SIGNIFICANTLY more than 1.5 packs. I'd be it would be at least an order of magnitude more.

Xenavire
05-11-2015, 05:55 PM
It's not really. Let's say they both had a 1% chance of happening. If you'd seen 13 Gold results and 7 Red results (and you had remembered the results of 1000 accurately without any biases) you'd probably feel the way you do. But you'd still be a couple of thousand rolls away from being able to make a statistically significant commentary on the expected rate of Red or Gold results.

I am not debating that they are both rare events. I am saying that thematically, red rolls should have less value but be more common, to fit with the idea of the rarities.

The fact that they are even close in terms of drops (using your example of both being 1%) just means that the system doesn't work in a way I feel comfortable with. I don't claim to be any kind of posterboy for statistical perfection, but if my results are even close to the truth, red rolls are too rare in the grand scheme of things for me to feel comfortable.

(This is also one of those times where I could get several red rolls in a row and still support them being more common that gold rolls. I never felt like packs from the wheels were right either.)

darkwonders
05-11-2015, 06:09 PM
Now that gold has jumped so high, I'm going to stop rolling chests until they're able to be open. Then I'll be able to determine if it's worth spending money to roll them.

katkillad
05-11-2015, 06:15 PM
It might be. What if there is an AA in there that only comes from Primal Chests? What is you're guaranteed to get the Vampire King sleeves from a Primal Chest? Both of those things would sell for SIGNIFICANTLY more than 1.5 packs. I'd be it would be at least an order of magnitude more.

One of us is confused and I'm not sure if it's me or you. I'm talking about increase in gold value and how that is negatively impacting decisions on rolling chests. What you are suggesting is information I don't have available to me currently or you are talking about opening chests in which case unless you have to roll a chest prior to opening it I don't think it has much to do with what I'm talking about.

hex_colin
05-11-2015, 06:20 PM
I am not debating that they are both rare events. I am saying that thematically, red rolls should have less value but be more common, to fit with the idea of the rarities.

The fact that they are even close in terms of drops (using your example of both being 1%) just means that the system doesn't work in a way I feel comfortable with. I don't claim to be any kind of posterboy for statistical perfection, but if my results are even close to the truth, red rolls are too rare in the grand scheme of things for me to feel comfortable.

(This is also one of those times where I could get several red rolls in a row and still support them being more common that gold rolls. I never felt like packs from the wheels were right either.)

Why? You've assigned a preconceived notion of rarity on them that may or may not exist. They are different results. One is not necessarily better than the other, it all depends on your perspective.

hex_colin
05-11-2015, 06:23 PM
One of us is confused and I'm not sure if it's me or you. I'm talking about increase in gold value and how that is negatively impacting decisions on rolling chests. What you are suggesting is information I don't have available to me currently or you are talking about opening chests in which case unless you have to roll a chest prior to opening it I don't think it has much to do with what I'm talking about.

It was always supposed to be a prohibitive Gold sink. I don't think the expectation is that all chests get rolled.

Also, what is in the chests is entirely relevant to the conversation - it is the single most important piece of information needed to decide whether or not rolling a given chest is worthwhile irrespective of the value of Gold (unless they is such a huge excess that accumulation of it is trivial).

Parzival
05-11-2015, 06:32 PM
Likewise Darkwonders, I've rolled up my commons and uncommons and a couple of legendary and primal chests to open as a sampler.

Now we wait...

I do wish I had more gold to keep up with my new chest, I remember the days of 40k gold for a Set 2 pack :cool:

hex_colin
05-11-2015, 06:36 PM
Likewise Darkwonders, I've rolled up my commons and uncommons and a couple of legendary and primal chests to open as a sampler.

Now we wait...

I do wish I had more gold to keep up with my new chest, I remember the days of 40k gold for a Set 2 pack :cool:

I only ever rolled enough chests to get all of the Sleeves. I have a large number still to roll, and quite a bit of Gold banked.

katkillad
05-11-2015, 06:40 PM
It was always supposed to be a prohibitive Gold sink. I don't think the expectation is that all chests get rolled.

Also, what is in the chests is entirely relevant to the conversation - it is the single most important piece of information needed to decide whether or not rolling a given chest is worthwhile irrespective of the value of Gold (unless they is such a huge excess that accumulation of it is trivial).

I'm not suggesting we should be able to roll every chest, that wasn't even really possible when we were getting gold in tournaments and packs were fetching 45k gold. I'm pointing out that the chest rolling gold sink is pretty sensitive to the value of gold, especially when seeing the kinds of increases we are seeing in the value of gold.

I can choose to roll a chest or not roll a chest, the contents of the chest have noting to do with the cost of rolling that chest as rolling that chest has no impact on whatever is inside the chest and I obtain that chest regardless if I'm going to roll it or not. So no, I don't see how it's relevant.

Xenavire
05-11-2015, 06:41 PM
Why? You've assigned a preconceived notion of rarity on them that may or may not exist. They are different results. One is not necessarily better than the other, it all depends on your perspective.

A perspective heavily reinforced by the rarity of the items given. Shiitake Chef? Rare. Water Elemental? Rare. Veteran Gladiator? Uncommon. Scraptech Brawler? Uncommon. All red rolls. Now, all the gold roll counterparts? All one rarity level higher.

If the system didn't have an inherent and obvious distinction between the two in terms of laying out the rarities, I honestly wouldn't even mind. But red rolls are objectively the more common in terms of rarity icons - and I feel that the rarity of the roll should reflect that. Alternatively they could change up the distribution so that there was no clear rarity discrepancy - that would satisfy me too, although I still think that removing the packs from red rolls is an all-around good idea. (That one is mostly opinion, since the booster packs seem to be balancing out the value between the two results, but I think it is more aggravating than helpful.)

hex_colin
05-11-2015, 06:44 PM
A perspective heavily reinforced by the rarity of the items given. Shiitake Chef? Rare. Water Elemental? Rare. Veteran Gladiator? Uncommon. Scraptech Brawler? Uncommon. All red rolls. Now, all the gold roll counterparts? All one rarity level higher.

If the system didn't have an inherent and obvious distinction between the two in terms of laying out the rarities, I honestly wouldn't even mind. But red rolls are objectively the more common in terms of rarity icons - and I feel that the rarity of the roll should reflect that. Alternatively they could change up the distribution so that there was no clear rarity discrepancy - that would satisfy me too, although I still think that removing the packs from red rolls is an all-around good idea. (That one is mostly opinion, since the booster packs seem to be balancing out the value between the two results, but I think it is more aggravating than helpful.)

OK, so even if we took that as the design and intent. You're still basing that on your experience though. My experience has been that I see Red results significantly more frequently than Gold. By more than 2:1. Over a much higher sample size. The system is not broken and/or badly designed because of your results and your perception of those results. It is entirely more likely that you are a statistical outlier. Someone has to be...

Thrawn
05-11-2015, 06:47 PM
It's not really. Let's say they both had a 1% chance of happening. If you'd seen 13 Gold results and 7 Red results (and you had remembered the results of 1000 accurately without any biases) you'd probably feel the way you do. But you'd still be a couple of thousand rolls away from being able to make a statistically significant commentary on the expected rate of Red or Gold results.

A sample size of 1,000 with an observed proportion of 13 results would tell you statistically that the true proportion is between 0.6% and 2% with a confidence level of 95%. You could be 99.9% confident that the true proportion is between 0.12% and 2.48%.

Of course any number of things that are configured in the way that drops work could completely throw the numbers off, but statistically 1,000 rolls is significant.

hex_colin
05-11-2015, 06:50 PM
I'm not suggesting we should be able to roll every chest, that wasn't even really possible when we were getting gold in tournaments and packs were fetching 45k gold. I'm pointing out that the chest rolling gold sink is pretty sensitive to the value of gold, especially when seeing the kinds of increases we are seeing in the value of gold.

I can choose to roll a chest or not roll a chest, the contents of the chest have noting to do with the cost of rolling that chest as rolling that chest has no impact on whatever is inside the chest and I obtain that chest regardless if I'm going to roll it or not. So no, I don't see how it's relevant.

It's entirely relevant - if [((the contents of an upgraded chest) * (chance of getting an upgraded chest)) + (potential value of other results)] > [(the contents of an unrolled chest) + (value of gold)] then you'd roll every time you could. You can't make a reasonable determination about whether or not rolling is worth it until we know what is in the chests and the rate at which it appears. Maybe you don't get that the content of the chest can be vastly different depending on the result of the roll? We're not just considering the WoF spin rewards here.

hex_colin
05-11-2015, 06:53 PM
A sample size of 1,000 with an observed proportion of 13 results would tell you statistically that the true proportion is between 0.6% and 2% with a confidence level of 95%. You could be 99.9% confident that the true proportion is between 0.12% and 2.48%.

Still not close enough to say anything about the relative rates of Red and Gold results at those confidence levels though. At 99% confidence Gold could be 2.48% and Red could be 0.03%, just as Gold could be 0.12% and Red could be 1.23%. You still don't have enough results to know which is truly rarer.

EDIT: If the result rate for either Gold or Red was 1% you'd need 70000 trials to confirm the percentage to within 0.1% (i.e. 0.9% to 1.1%) at 99% confidence. 40000 trials to confirm within 0.1% at 95% confidence.

israel.kendall
05-11-2015, 06:57 PM
https://media.giphy.com/media/Rn2qVVz7aTNwQ/giphy.gif

hex_colin
05-11-2015, 07:01 PM
https://media.giphy.com/media/Rn2qVVz7aTNwQ/giphy.gif

No posting private pictures taken at my house on these boards please... ;)

Xenavire
05-11-2015, 07:02 PM
OK, so even if we took that as the design and intent. You're still basing that on your experience though. My experience has been that I see Red results significantly more frequently than Gold. By more than 2:1. Over a much higher sample size. The system is not broken and/or badly designed because of your results and your perception of those results. It is entirely more likely that you are a statistical outlier. Someone has to be...

Based on the number of people I have seen with the same experience, I am either falling victim to some confirmation bias... Or you may be the outlier. Now, I am willing to admit that the first option is incredibly possible, even highly likely, but I have never heard anyone but you say that gold rolls were significantly rarer that red rolls.

This is spread among multiple threads, in-game chat, guild members, even the wheels data thread didn't seem to support the conclusion that red rolls are more common than gold ones (although I don't see any complete data that is easily accessible). I have seen zero evidence to support your theory from any source except yourself.

All I can say, is if I am wrong, fine, but I am most definitely not alone feeling that red rolls feel far too rare, and I don't actually think any of the rewards are worth being so rare (in the red slot.) I 100% support the removal of packs in order to make the rare results more common, and I don't need you to agree with me, or even understand why I feel that way. I also know it is unlikely to change, even though I feel like it would be a net positive change.

katkillad
05-11-2015, 07:12 PM
It's entirely relevant - if [((the contents of an upgraded chest) * (chance of getting an upgraded chest)) + (potential value of other results)] > (the contents of an unrolled chest) then you'd roll every time you could. You can't make a reasonable determination about whether or not rolling is worth it until we know what is in the chests and the rate at which it appears. Maybe you don't get that the content of the chest can be vastly different depending on the result of the roll? We're not just considering the WoF spin rewards here.

Until the public sees what is inside chests, upgrading chests isn't something I'm taking into consideration when considering the value of rolling chests. I'm using the information I have available to me currently. Also again my point isn't really about the contents of the chest, it's how chest rolling has more than doubled in price when you consider the increase in value of gold and is becoming more prohibitive as golds value increases.

6 months ago it would cost 113 plat to roll a legendary chest and now it costs 316 plat. I can't make my argument anymore clear at this point.

hex_colin
05-11-2015, 07:14 PM
Until the public sees what is inside chests, upgrading chests isn't something I'm taking into consideration when considering the value of rolling chests. I'm using the information I have available to me currently. Also again my point isn't really about the contents of the chest, it's how chest rolling has more than doubled in price when you consider the increase in value of gold and is becoming more prohibitive as golds value increases.

6 months ago it would cost 113 plat to roll a legendary chest and now it costs 316 plat. I can't make my argument anymore clear at this point.

You have to consider the contents though. The only reasonable strategy is to wait. Anyone who rolls chests for anything other than the sleeves (since that's the only way to get them) is making sub-optimal decisions until we know what the contents are.

hex_colin
05-11-2015, 07:20 PM
You have to consider the contents though. The only reasonable strategy is to wait. Anyone who rolls chests for anything other than the sleeves (since that's the only way to get them) is making sub-optimal decisions until we know what the contents are.

Also, the value of Gold was always going to increase over time. We already knew we didn't have all of the Gold sinks that would be available (we still don't!). And we also know that we were getting Gold through an unintended means as a temporary measure so that we could do something with the chests. It's current value is still meaningless because we still don't have the full economy (missing lots of faucets and sinks) and also because we don't know whether the recent increase is at all relevant (since the upgraded contents could be worth so much more that the recent increase is trivial).

Xenavire
05-11-2015, 07:33 PM
You have to consider the contents though. The only reasonable strategy is to wait. Anyone who rolls chests for anything other than the sleeves (since that's the only way to get them) is making sub-optimal decisions until we know what the contents are.

This comment makes me sad, because it is the 100% truth. If I had the sleeves I wouldn't even touch my chests at all until we could open them. Sadly I still need to roll. And roll. And roll.... I am going to go sit in a corner and be depressed.

hex_colin
05-11-2015, 07:34 PM
This comment makes me sad, because it is the 100% truth. If I had the sleeves I wouldn't even touch my chests at all until we could open them. Sadly I still need to roll. And roll. And roll.... I am going to go sit in a corner and be depressed.

Yeah, I had over 1200 rolls just for the Set 2 sleeves. It was beyond painful. :(

Chark assures me that I was particularly unlucky though.

israel.kendall
05-11-2015, 07:42 PM
Yeah, I had over 1200 rolls just for the Set 2 sleeves. It was beyond painful. :(

Chark assures me that I was particularly unlucky though.

I am pretty sure you were particularly unlucky, I got my set 2 sleeves with much less than half that amount of spins.

TOOT
05-11-2015, 07:49 PM
Most of this talk/speculation is meaningless.

If 90% of the rare chests awarded 8000 gold, and 10% some PVE/Sleeve/AA item, nobody would complain the cost of spinning chests is too high.

As others have said, wait until the chests are able to be opened before jumping to conclusions about it not being "worth it".

darkwonders
05-11-2015, 07:51 PM
I'm missing The Gladiator Sleeve from S1 and the Scraptech and Azurefate from set 2, so... 1/2 way there!

magic_gazz
05-11-2015, 07:59 PM
It might be. What if there is an AA in there that only comes from Primal Chests? What is you're guaranteed to get the Vampire King sleeves from a Primal Chest? Both of those things would sell for SIGNIFICANTLY more than 1.5 packs. I'd be it would be at least an order of magnitude more.

Wrong :P

You cant sell the sleeves (unless they come in code form).

Here is me still hating sleeves not being tradeable. I only have the common sleeves from set 2 and don't have that many set 2 chests left to spin (or the gold to spin them), so the thought of getting them is pretty much gone.

Xenavire
05-11-2015, 08:02 PM
Yeah, I had over 1200 rolls just for the Set 2 sleeves. It was beyond painful. :(

Chark assures me that I was particularly unlucky though.

Ugh, I would be happy to have either sleeve at the point I am at, but I A) don't have enough money to get that many chests, and B) I haven't had enough resources to get the gold needed to roll that many in the first place.

It does frustrate me to no end when I get only uncommon or higher rarity chests out of draft entries though (which happens on a regular basis). *shudder* I don't know if Kismet loves me, hates me, or just likes to torment me.

ossuary
05-11-2015, 08:04 PM
I'm still missing my scraptech sleeves, and it took my 594 spins to get the azurefate ones. I have both set 1 sleeves though, thank god, because I ran out of commons, uncommons, and rares to spin. :p

Xenavire
05-11-2015, 08:07 PM
Wrong :P

You cant sell the sleeves (unless they come in code form).

Here is me still hating sleeves not being tradeable. I only have the common sleeves from set 2 and don't have that many set 2 chests left to spin (or the gold to spin them), so the thought of getting them is pretty much gone.

I may support some sleeves not being tradeable, but I would love it if the RNG 'locked' sleeves (only available through RNG, and not through any other method) were tradeable. I get kicked around by RNG enough as it is, so I am actively dreading future wheel of fate sleeves, and the potential of chest sleeves being low % drops. (I would hate that so much that I would likely put my fist through a wall. Really, if VK sleeves are a 1% drop from primal chests, I may as well just give up on pimping out my deck with that sleeve, because I can't afford to gamble like that.)

vickrpg
05-11-2015, 08:08 PM
As others have said, wait until the chests are able to be opened before jumping to conclusions about it not being "worth it".

I don't think anyone is judging whether they will or won't be worth it. but RIGHT NOW, with the information we have, It is not worth it, the correct answer isn't "Spend your gold elsewhere" (although, those AAs...) The correct answer is "Wait". but since the AAs are available right now, CURRENTLY they are a better decision than rolling chests, with the information we have now.

magic_gazz
05-11-2015, 10:00 PM
I may support some sleeves not being tradeable, but I would love it if the RNG 'locked' sleeves (only available through RNG, and not through any other method) were tradeable. I get kicked around by RNG enough as it is, so I am actively dreading future wheel of fate sleeves, and the potential of chest sleeves being low % drops. (I would hate that so much that I would likely put my fist through a wall. Really, if VK sleeves are a 1% drop from primal chests, I may as well just give up on pimping out my deck with that sleeve, because I can't afford to gamble like that.)

Locked sleeves for special events or achievements would be fine with me (except things like beating a boss who never shows up), but I have yet to see anyone come up with any good reasons to have all sleeves untradeable.

Its not a big deal in the scheme of things, but why have a feature that annoys people?

Gwaer
05-11-2015, 10:41 PM
Sleeves do literally nothing. It doesn't matter if you have them all. In fact unless you bought dragon Lord eternal and producer tiers it's impossible to have them all from the outset. But anyone you see with a special sleeve did a thing to get it. That's what's cool about them and why of all the things they're the only thing you can't just but. You've gotta earn them.

israel.kendall
05-11-2015, 10:44 PM
Sleeves do literally nothing. It doesn't matter if you have them all. In fact unless you bought dragon Lord eternal and producer tiers it's impossible to have them all from the outset. But anyone you see with a special sleeve did a thing to get it. That's what's cool about them and why of all the things they're the only thing you can't just but. You've gotta earn them.

I did a special thing of buying 2014 GenCon sleeve code off some guy.

magic_gazz
05-11-2015, 11:41 PM
Sleeves do literally nothing. It doesn't matter if you have them all. In fact unless you bought dragon Lord eternal and producer tiers it's impossible to have them all from the outset. But anyone you see with a special sleeve did a thing to get it. That's what's cool about them and why of all the things they're the only thing you can't just but. You've gotta earn them.

Who cares if they do nothing?

Hitting RNG is not "earning them" as you put it and nothing you said provides a good reason for them not to be tradable. As far as I can tell the only thing making them not tradeable does is make it a RNGfest to get the sleeves.

Roy_G
05-12-2015, 04:09 AM
I agree that the RNG sleeves should be tradable,it's ridicilously low chances to get them and it becomes frustrating after hundreds and hundrends of sleeves to not get them.It becomes not fun to chase them.

darkwonders
05-12-2015, 05:14 AM
I'm still missing my scraptech sleeves, and it took my 594 spins to get the azurefate ones. I have both set 1 sleeves though, thank god, because I ran out of commons, uncommons, and rares to spin. :p

Isn't there 3 set 1 sleeves?

hex_colin
05-12-2015, 05:21 AM
Wrong :P

You cant sell the sleeves (unless they come in code form).

Here is me still hating sleeves not being tradeable. I only have the common sleeves from set 2 and don't have that many set 2 chests left to spin (or the gold to spin them), so the thought of getting them is pretty much gone.

I'm not wrong. You'll be able to trade the chest before opening. So, if they were a guaranteed drop, you could effectively sell them.

Xenavire
05-12-2015, 05:28 AM
Isn't there 3 set 1 sleeves?

The commons are basically a given (it will be incredibly rare for anyone to have the 4 rare sleeves and still be hunting for the common ones.)

Statistically unlikely as it is, it could happen, but lets assume Oss isn't one of those people. :p

ossuary
05-12-2015, 05:31 AM
Isn't there 3 set 1 sleeves?

I don't count the common sleeves because it's almost impossible NOT to get those within a few dozen spins... that just happens. When you're talking about 600+ spins, there's no way anyone would fail to get those.

Elwinz
05-12-2015, 06:36 AM
i am not sure i spun over 100 chests and havent seen any sleeves ^^

DocX
05-12-2015, 08:46 AM
You've gotta earn them.

Absolutely! You've got to earn those sleeves by being lucky and rolling well on the Wheels of Fate! . . . which isn't really earning as much as being lucky. . .

Gwaer
05-12-2015, 09:45 AM
You earn different sleeves in different ways. Yep, these are either luck or persistence. The sleeves from events are from either getting the code at the event or finding someone who was there with an extra.

magic_gazz
05-12-2015, 03:25 PM
I'm not wrong. You'll be able to trade the chest before opening. So, if they were a guaranteed drop, you could effectively sell them.

Didn't even think of that lol

magic_gazz
05-12-2015, 03:28 PM
I agree that the RNG sleeves should be tradable,it's ridicilously low chances to get them and it becomes frustrating after hundreds and hundrends of sleeves to not get them.It becomes not fun to chase them.

This is exactly the problem, it is not fun.

Having an element that is not fun doesn't seem like a good idea.

I cant imagine how bad it is for people who have not done about 400 drafts. Sleeves to them must seem impossible.

israel.kendall
05-12-2015, 03:28 PM
Didn't even think of that lol

If there were guaranteed sleeves in each chest it would give incentive to sell the chests rather than opening them. I hope they don't do this.

Xenavire
05-12-2015, 03:31 PM
If there were guaranteed sleeves in each chest it would give incentive to sell the chests rather than opening them. I hope they don't do this.

Depends on the other rewards. And even a 50+% chance would make selling them attractive, and buying them attractive, without making it a horribly punishing RNG issue.

israel.kendall
05-12-2015, 03:39 PM
Depends on the other rewards. And even a 50+% chance would make selling them attractive, and buying them attractive, without making it a horribly punishing RNG issue.

I don't mind RNG, but then probably wouldn't mind any other system either. As long as I don't feel like I'm losing out by opening the chest. I think with 50% chance I would still feel like I was wasting sleeves if I already had them. I guess friends could trade around chests to open and get all the sleeves. Like let a friend open the chest for the sleeve, then give you the rest of the contents. But then it is just a pain in the butt.

Gwaer
05-12-2015, 03:50 PM
primal guarantees sleeve.

if you have sleeve primal guarantees next level of prize

if you have next level of prize you get the next one instead.

on and on

thousands of primal chests later dinner at cory's house.


That's a ladder I wouldn't climb very high.

ossuary
05-12-2015, 04:25 PM
The next level after "Dinner With Cory" is "Permanently Rename Phenteo with the Typo of Your Choice." That's the one I want.

Gwaer
05-12-2015, 05:05 PM
... there was something that would make me climb that ladder afterall...