This post makes all the sense and i was thinking about it too... Some of the legendaries should be epic, some of the epics should be rare and some of the rare should be common, in order to have the same proportion of the classic set.
People's first reaction is to get excited with a high number of legendaries, but in fact this is a bad thing.
The result is that after opening 66 packs i have 2 of all the common cards and most of the rares. And the odds of my GvG pack result in 40 dust is almost as big as it would be if i was opening a classic pack... wich is totally boring since the expansion was released 2 days ago...
But i only have 3 GvG legendaries and a few epics... even if i bought more 300 packs (witch i will not) probably i would still lack half the set... kinda disappointed with this...
Yes, the rarity distribution is different which would to that you going to obtain all commons and rares faster compared to the Classic set. A bigger inpact though would have been to change the rarity droprate distribution, which them glaldy did not do. You can even use the same currency, gold and dust, to buy the pack or create missing cards with dust. I would not complain. No other company is this geneous in a f2p - game.
You also have to accommodate for the fact that many players were sitting on piles of dust before the expansion which contributes to the inflation of the intrinsic pack value.
starting from nothing it might take more packs, but on average I assume that most players will only buy in moderation and craft the rest.
^^ this is exactly what I did, Just played arena and did dailies for a couple of months and accumulated nearly 15000 dust and 4000 gold, so bought 30 packs and kept a bit for arenas and will just craft the cards I want for messing around on ladder and should accrue the majority of the GvG cards that matter and will just pick the rest up later. So Blizzard was actually extremely kind to let players do that. This favors people who have been playing the game for a long while and I almost feel like its some sort of appreciation to the gamers who have stayed loyal and continued playing the game.
The one issue I see for the growth of the game are the people who pick the game up now only, as they will be even further behind and almost have to invest financially in the game to enjoy the game on ladder. This will be where Blizzard will make up for the experienced players who have saved for GvG.
Actually not true. I was thinking like you that it's not in the best interest of new players to keep just one currency (dust) for both sets. But if you think about it it's acutally better for new players as well. Why? Casue they can buy whatever set they prefer and spend the extra dust on the other set.
Operative word is "buy" there. I created a thread previously on money spent on the game, Many said they were happy to spend and others were also happy to leave it as F2P. I agree the dust gives you the options to craft both old and new which does help the beginners but the flip side is that there are just more cards now that it makes it that little bit tougher to catch up. My opinion is that if I picked up the game now from scratch I would feel I'd have to purchase at least 60-80 packs to get somewhat decent cards to build a deck that's competitive.
Actually not true. I was thinking like you that it's not in the best interest of new players to keep just one currency (dust) for both sets. But if you think about it it's acutally better for new players as well. Why? Casue they can buy whatever set they prefer and spend the extra dust on the other set.
Operative word is "buy" there. I created a thread previously on money spent on the game, Many said they were happy to spend and others were also happy to leave it as F2P. I agree the dust gives you the options to craft both old and new which does help the beginners but the flip side is that there are just more cards now that it makes it that little bit tougher to catch up. My opinion is that if I picked up the game now from scratch I would feel I'd have to purchase at least 60-80 packs to get somewhat decent cards to build a deck that's competitive.
Your post and especially the last sentence shows an issue in the mindset of a majority of the Hearthstone community. Yeah you probably need to have opened at least 80 packs - regardless of wether they have been beought with money or gold - to build one or multiple competitive decks and that takes either a lot of time or money.
But this is a casual game and especially new players do not have the need to play a competitve deck. Netdecking became such an issue that there is the general assumption of needing multiple legendaries and epics to play the game which actually affects those discussions about the free2play model of the game.
But in fact it is very easy to obtain the base cards and a bunch of classic set cards within a few days or weeks of playing and people who just play the game for fun those that are commonly refered to as casuals don't need to have that Ysera to tech out their super expensive Control Warrior deck.
Money is pretty much an requirement if you want to assemble all of those competitive decks but it isn't when it comes to just playing the game and having fun at doing that, thats what a game is supposed to be about and that is completely free.
That last line of my paragraph maybe just indicates the kind of person I am, I'm competitive. I remember when I first started I got all the basic cards and then I played only arena worth about $60 to get the packs from it and experience. I still feel that option is viable to learn the game and build a collection as it did help me a lot. I had a friend who started about a month back and I would help him with his arena's when I could and granted he got a lot better and was getting around 4-5 wins an arena. So he would get 60 to 80 gold and then need to do a daily or 2 to get the rest, he was getting so frustrated going against net decks at rank 21 or even casual that he actually stopped playing. He wasn't prepared to pay to catch up and that's him gone from the game.
Casually I 100% agree that you can make fun decks that are playable and will get you wins here and there for sure. To be competitive however I honestly feel you have to spend initially to progress up the ranks.
Yes I think drop rates of some commons are weird. (got 7 warmauls, 8 crackles, 9 spider tanks, ets from 60 packs) But is it really affecting spent money on the set? NO. If you had like 4 duplicates of all common cards from 60 packs, you had the same amount of dust as it is right now (with 8-10 copies of some commons in 60 packs). Because from 60 packs u getting all commons 2x anyway.
Real problem is the actual number of common cards, to few. And to many epics.
Your post shows an issue of low IQ my son.
Who are you to talk to people like that.
And there is no more humiliation for any person than IQ test. But Americans think in other way.
Despite all the math n stuff. I think the ratio is lower than the classic packs. I opened 120 packs from gvg and got 3 legendaries. Same hapend to reynad, sjow, a couple other streamers aswell. From classic packs I would get ATLEAST 2 per 40 packs that I bought, usually 3 to 5. Also I got alot less epics from gvg packs. I'm sure there's some crazy formula for all this but I think they straight up lowered the drop rate for more money
interesting analysis. You are correct: you do end up with more copies rather than new cards in this set. However, I wonder if it's too different in the end. There are a good number of 'meh' to 'very meh' common and rare cards in the classic set. Thus many of those 'non-copies' end up on worthless cards that you just keep for collections sake. A card you aren't going to use is just dust whether it's a 3rd copy of a Mountain Giant or your first Kidnapper.
Thus I'd say a proper analysis is more about the number of 'possibly usable' cards in the comparative sets. Note that I don't my highly competitive. Cards for 'fun' decks count too. A murloc Warleader is usable in the deck it's made for. No one's found a use for Kidnapper.
It might be the case that, in the end, the smaller set of commons is helpful if you're casual since you're more likely to get the card you WANT rather than a lot of cards you don't.
Note that this is speculation. It might prove to be worse in the end. It's also rather subjective. Is Blingtron good enough to count?
Btw, new players wouldn't be that bad off. I've joined card games with a good few expansions involved. What happens is that a lot of the cards you worked HARD to make before I came have become obsolete or at least noncritical. There's a good chance new players won't have to work to craft Ysera. It's possible they'll never have to craft Preparation. Someday, they may never have to craft a Rag. Basically new players just figure out what the newest decks are and JUST craft that. It's a little easier. You gather decks for the expansion where most of the commons sit at then use dust for the rares in the other expansions.
Remember, new players aren't going to start in Classic, get the cards there, then get the GvG cards, then Expnsion #2, then on up like we are going to. They will just skip ahead.
Well every thousand years when the stars align i happen to be wrong. That may happen.
But when counted there are 34 "Expert set collectible legendaries" while there are 19 GvG legendaries. Now when we look at the number of Classic cards there are 244 collectible ones while there are roughly 130 collectible ones (that might be wrong so feel free to correct me again) so isn't the ratio basically the same when it comes to overall card pool/number of legendaries?
In the case of me just being confused again feel free to ignore that post as well^^
There are 244 cards in the classic set you can obtain, 32 of which are legendary (ratio 24:3 = 1:8). There are 123 cards in GVG you can obtain, 20 of which are legendary (ratio 12:2 = 1:6).
Hi guys "Mistake were made" :D i count 33 legends in classic set. - 9 class + 24 neutrals = 33 :) so mistake :P edit: also there are 245 cards in classic set not 244... ! ratio is 1:7.(42)
Arithmetic nazi strike back :P
so 32 out of 245 compared to 123 out of 20.
Honestly that's not THAT different. However, I do note that there's half as many cards in GvG. Meaning you will get to '40 dust' mode in half the time.
I remember it was that that new players who are willing to pay are best to spend $40 in cards to get a 'head start'. After that, you start to hit repeats so the money isn't as worthwhile.
If that's true, then in theory you should hit that point in half the decks. Thus $20 is the point when you go from 'new new new' to '40 dust' modes.
Perhaps that's the reason why copies are easier to come by, especially since it seems people are more willing/able to dump a ton of gold/cash in right away than when the game started.
It is true that there are far fewer cards, so yeah, you'll be getting duplicates much faster than you would have done with the classic set. Still, 2:15 versus 1:6 is still quite significant when you consider the volume of cards people need to acquire in order to complete a set!
Wait, 2:15 vs 1:6?
It's 1:7.44 (Classic) vs 1:7.66 (GvG). (you rounded up on the calculation to 8)
A .22 difference between the two isn't THAT different.
The problem with this whole post is that you don't actually have any Data to back off your statements. You might have been a bit unlucky with packs and gotten less rares/epics than expecte but that does not allow a judgement over the overall distribution of those cards in GvG card packs.
You'd probably had to open at least a 1000 packs to get somewhat reliable information about that.
You tried to look smart. You failed.
100 packs is not enough to give a reasonable estimate of the rarity of legendaries. Since legendaries appear to be within the 2% to 10% of packs range, you would likely need over a thousand packs to get a good estimate. This is coming from someone who's taken 2nd year university statistics.
The problem with this whole post is that you don't actually have any Data to back off your statements. You might have been a bit unlucky with packs and gotten less rares/epics than expecte but that does not allow a judgement over the overall distribution of those cards in GvG card packs.
You'd probably had to open at least a 1000 packs to get somewhat reliable information about that.
You tried to look smart. You failed.
100 packs is not enough to give a reasonable estimate of the rarity of legendaries. Since legendaries appear to be within the 2% to 10% of packs range, you would likely need over a thousand packs to get a good estimate. This is coming from someone who's taken 2nd year university statistics.
Honestly, we have the data though. Just gather up all of the folks who posted their deck openings.
According to the old statement, you had a 5% chance of getting a legendary in each pack (thus the old '20 packs = 1legendary). If that held then 690 packs would bring 34.5 legendaries. Which is the amount the two got combined.
5% chance to get a legendary in each pack. It was proven in Classic and seems just as true now.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
One does not simply walk into Mordor,
unless they want to be the best they can be.
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Makes sense.
Although slightly offset by the fact that a lot of people have dust saved from the olds packs to craft the new legendaries
We do. The ratio of legendaries to non legendaries is higher but the chance of getting one is the same.
And here is the information to back up that assertion: https://twitter.com/bdbrode/status/532644945367023617
I got 7 crackles in 30 packs. snap, crackle x7, pop
This post makes all the sense and i was thinking about it too... Some of the legendaries should be epic, some of the epics should be rare and some of the rare should be common, in order to have the same proportion of the classic set.
People's first reaction is to get excited with a high number of legendaries, but in fact this is a bad thing.
The result is that after opening 66 packs i have 2 of all the common cards and most of the rares. And the odds of my GvG pack result in 40 dust is almost as big as it would be if i was opening a classic pack... wich is totally boring since the expansion was released 2 days ago...
But i only have 3 GvG legendaries and a few epics... even if i bought more 300 packs (witch i will not) probably i would still lack half the set... kinda disappointed with this...
Yes, the rarity distribution is different which would to that you going to obtain all commons and rares faster compared to the Classic set. A bigger inpact though would have been to change the rarity droprate distribution, which them glaldy did not do. You can even use the same currency, gold and dust, to buy the pack or create missing cards with dust. I would not complain. No other company is this geneous in a f2p - game.
You also have to accommodate for the fact that many players were sitting on piles of dust before the expansion which contributes to the inflation of the intrinsic pack value.
starting from nothing it might take more packs, but on average I assume that most players will only buy in moderation and craft the rest.
I have received two of the same common in a pack twice already, and I've only opened like 12 packs.
Only problem for me is that 60 packs bundle for Europe is 7 euros more expensive than on NA.
I ended up with a ton of Sheep and Crackle after opening 60 packs. Got a good number of Epics and 2 good Legendaries, but lots of dust.
Behold, the Might of Stormwind!
^^ this is exactly what I did, Just played arena and did dailies for a couple of months and accumulated nearly 15000 dust and 4000 gold, so bought 30 packs and kept a bit for arenas and will just craft the cards I want for messing around on ladder and should accrue the majority of the GvG cards that matter and will just pick the rest up later. So Blizzard was actually extremely kind to let players do that. This favors people who have been playing the game for a long while and I almost feel like its some sort of appreciation to the gamers who have stayed loyal and continued playing the game.
The one issue I see for the growth of the game are the people who pick the game up now only, as they will be even further behind and almost have to invest financially in the game to enjoy the game on ladder. This will be where Blizzard will make up for the experienced players who have saved for GvG.
Operative word is "buy" there. I created a thread previously on money spent on the game, Many said they were happy to spend and others were also happy to leave it as F2P. I agree the dust gives you the options to craft both old and new which does help the beginners but the flip side is that there are just more cards now that it makes it that little bit tougher to catch up. My opinion is that if I picked up the game now from scratch I would feel I'd have to purchase at least 60-80 packs to get somewhat decent cards to build a deck that's competitive.
That last line of my paragraph maybe just indicates the kind of person I am, I'm competitive. I remember when I first started I got all the basic cards and then I played only arena worth about $60 to get the packs from it and experience. I still feel that option is viable to learn the game and build a collection as it did help me a lot. I had a friend who started about a month back and I would help him with his arena's when I could and granted he got a lot better and was getting around 4-5 wins an arena. So he would get 60 to 80 gold and then need to do a daily or 2 to get the rest, he was getting so frustrated going against net decks at rank 21 or even casual that he actually stopped playing. He wasn't prepared to pay to catch up and that's him gone from the game.
Casually I 100% agree that you can make fun decks that are playable and will get you wins here and there for sure. To be competitive however I honestly feel you have to spend initially to progress up the ranks.
One word people: LCG
Yes I think drop rates of some commons are weird. (got 7 warmauls, 8 crackles, 9 spider tanks, ets from 60 packs) But is it really affecting spent money on the set? NO. If you had like 4 duplicates of all common cards from 60 packs, you had the same amount of dust as it is right now (with 8-10 copies of some commons in 60 packs). Because from 60 packs u getting all commons 2x anyway.
Real problem is the actual number of common cards, to few. And to many epics.
Who are you to talk to people like that.
And there is no more humiliation for any person than IQ test. But Americans think in other way.
Sry for grammar. I'm Russian who learned English from computer games. And I'm kinda learning Spanish with Hearthstone.
Despite all the math n stuff. I think the ratio is lower than the classic packs. I opened 120 packs from gvg and got 3 legendaries. Same hapend to reynad, sjow, a couple other streamers aswell. From classic packs I would get ATLEAST 2 per 40 packs that I bought, usually 3 to 5. Also I got alot less epics from gvg packs. I'm sure there's some crazy formula for all this but I think they straight up lowered the drop rate for more money
interesting analysis. You are correct: you do end up with more copies rather than new cards in this set. However, I wonder if it's too different in the end. There are a good number of 'meh' to 'very meh' common and rare cards in the classic set. Thus many of those 'non-copies' end up on worthless cards that you just keep for collections sake. A card you aren't going to use is just dust whether it's a 3rd copy of a Mountain Giant or your first Kidnapper.
Thus I'd say a proper analysis is more about the number of 'possibly usable' cards in the comparative sets. Note that I don't my highly competitive. Cards for 'fun' decks count too. A murloc Warleader is usable in the deck it's made for. No one's found a use for Kidnapper.
It might be the case that, in the end, the smaller set of commons is helpful if you're casual since you're more likely to get the card you WANT rather than a lot of cards you don't.
Note that this is speculation. It might prove to be worse in the end. It's also rather subjective. Is Blingtron good enough to count?
Btw, new players wouldn't be that bad off. I've joined card games with a good few expansions involved. What happens is that a lot of the cards you worked HARD to make before I came have become obsolete or at least noncritical. There's a good chance new players won't have to work to craft Ysera. It's possible they'll never have to craft Preparation. Someday, they may never have to craft a Rag. Basically new players just figure out what the newest decks are and JUST craft that. It's a little easier. You gather decks for the expansion where most of the commons sit at then use dust for the rares in the other expansions.
Remember, new players aren't going to start in Classic, get the cards there, then get the GvG cards, then Expnsion #2, then on up like we are going to. They will just skip ahead.
One does not simply walk into Mordor,
unless they want to be the best they can be.
so 32 out of 245 compared to 123 out of 20.
Honestly that's not THAT different. However, I do note that there's half as many cards in GvG. Meaning you will get to '40 dust' mode in half the time.
I remember it was that that new players who are willing to pay are best to spend $40 in cards to get a 'head start'. After that, you start to hit repeats so the money isn't as worthwhile.
If that's true, then in theory you should hit that point in half the decks. Thus $20 is the point when you go from 'new new new' to '40 dust' modes.
Perhaps that's the reason why copies are easier to come by, especially since it seems people are more willing/able to dump a ton of gold/cash in right away than when the game started.
One does not simply walk into Mordor,
unless they want to be the best they can be.
Wait, 2:15 vs 1:6?
It's 1:7.44 (Classic) vs 1:7.66 (GvG). (you rounded up on the calculation to 8)
A .22 difference between the two isn't THAT different.
One does not simply walk into Mordor,
unless they want to be the best they can be.
100 packs is not enough to give a reasonable estimate of the rarity of legendaries. Since legendaries appear to be within the 2% to 10% of packs range, you would likely need over a thousand packs to get a good estimate. This is coming from someone who's taken 2nd year university statistics.
Honestly, we have the data though. Just gather up all of the folks who posted their deck openings.
http://www.reddit.com/r/hearthstone/comments/2ore6w/my_gvg_pack_opening_experience/
270 packs, 14 legendaries, 1 of them gold.
Amaz's packs:
http://www.reddit.com/r/hearthstone/comments/2ornhx/420_packs_opened_amaz_here_are_the_stats/
420 packs. 20 legendaries, 1 of them gold
There's 690 right there.
According to the old statement, you had a 5% chance of getting a legendary in each pack (thus the old '20 packs = 1legendary). If that held then 690 packs would bring 34.5 legendaries. Which is the amount the two got combined.
5% chance to get a legendary in each pack. It was proven in Classic and seems just as true now.
One does not simply walk into Mordor,
unless they want to be the best they can be.