The dust/pack average is currently set on HS Wiki at 102.71, based on the opening of 32,697 packs for a total of 163,485 cards. If you know a better source for this data I'll gladly include that in the table (I'm not being ironic, or sarcastic)
I know that. I just don't like this figure since it's misleading.
I once took a closer look at the tables of pack opening statistics myself and then analysed roughly 1400 packs. I could have done more, but honestly, I did this all in one day and then I was a bit dried out, so bear with me that it's a not a huge number.
Anyway, what I did was to measure the average dust/pack value in blocks of 50 packs. My main problem with the numbers on the wiki was, that they all looked at very large numbers of pack openings, like people opening several hundred or thousand packs. Most players don't open thousands of packs. A more realistic number of packs seemed to me to be 50, since that's the amount you get from a pre-order.
As a result, many of these 50-blocks were under 100 dust per pack. And those that were at or above 100 ususally featured at least 4 or more legendaries or golden epics (400+ packs), which is alreay considered to be above average (1 in 20, 2.5 in 50). And of course, what really skews the results, are golden Legendaries since, as is said, one is already raising the average amount for 50 packs by over 30.
Almost every single block of 50 had 25 or more 40 dust packs. Only one had 24. To give a general idea (no exact numbers here yet), about 35 packs were under 100, and another 10-12 were between 100 and 180.So, it really came down to the best 4 or 5 packs in a block to determine whether it was above or below 100. From a statistical point of view, this is problematic.
If you would try to determine the average temperature in your local region, and found out that the average temperature is about 16°C across the year, but then you had two days where the temperature was 100000°C, while certainly unrealistic, you couldn't really say that the average temperature is far over 100°C across the year. The "average" number is misleading when it is heavily influenced by rare occurences that are far above normal. And that is exactly what happens with packs in Hearthstone. People who claim that the average amount of dust per pack is 100 have to assume, that you open enough packs to get lucky once in a while, preferably with a golden legendary, to end up with that number.
Most people open less packs, have less of a chance to get that lucky, and are more likely to end up with about 92 dust per pack, or even less. .
You have a good point for your opinion, cassetto. But if we compare the WW 50$ vs BB 50$ I think there's more real dust value in that extra packs considering that you might open up some cards that you would otherwise enchant, am I right? Of course there's just a chance that you would like and want the extra cards. Unfortunately we can't calculate that, but I hope you get my point. There would be some extra value in the extra 20 packs we got in WW.
Your chart proves that WW deal was a little better then the usual, this one too. The "price increase" (I'm only looking on DUST per $) isn't as bad as they (we) say, but there is a slight price increase. I think that is outrageous considering the circumstances (MTG Arena), you think that's great, well this are just human preferences and it's no point on disagreeing in that, we are all free people after all.
P.S If you want to make blizzard a favor add a K&K line in your excel.
Trying to coax people into spending as much as possible is generally deemed unethical.
Snip
Considering that Hearthstone already works by a lootbox system
Snip
Just some small corrections/comments here: trying to convince your customers to spend more money is what all salespeople in every field do for a living. And all marketers I suppose. It's the nature of retail. You are showing people that by spending more money you are getting more value, and therefore spending the money is good for both parties. This is normal, not unethical. Unethical behavior is trying to deceive people into thinking they'd be better off when they wouldn't, like payday lenders who prey on the needy, or people who market inaccurately. If Blizzard had marketed the big bundle as giving you a hero when you actually had a 1% chance to open one then you'd have a point. As it is, spending more gives you more packs, which you can, entirely at your discretion, turn into cards you want by dusting,, or open cards you want, etc.
That leads me to point two. Calling the system a "lootbox" system ignores a number of important points. Firstly the dust system; the more packs you open, you are GUARANTEED to eventually get the cards you want because you can dust the cards you get and make the card you want. Sure, we can argue on the value, but the analysis here was done entirely on dust value (and yes there is variance but eventually you will get to the average value. That's how statistics work). Secondly, 'boosters' have been a part of collectible card games for a very long time (possibly forever, certainly since MTG in the early 90s and I'm not sure any came before). Sure, you can buy individual cards but a single top card will go for FAR more than you will buy a full T1 HS deck for. And you can't get any of them for free like HS. Nor can you play nearly as much.
And finally, if we're defining a "whale" as anyone who would spend $130 on a computer game then every single AAA game sold caters 100% to 'whales', and if we expand this definition to people who will spend over $130 on something they enjoy then it also will include most people who go to sports matches, and who play sport or dance competitively, and people who go out every weekend drinking etc etc etc. Smokers? HUGE whales. I could go on. Ever spend $100 in a shop on something you like? Computer keyboard? How much did your monitor cost? Graphics card? Man, you're a mega-whale. So the word isn't really fit for purpose, and is really only serving as unnecessary hyperbole in a thread about facts and figures.
It's obvious that the bundles are much more convenient than buying packs. It's the reason why bundles exist (other than milking money from customers of course xD). Thank you for the analysis but it seems pretty logical to me (as it is logical that 70 packs for 50$ are better than 50 for the same price).
70 packs for $50 is the standard bundle (seriously? you give us that and then take a step backwards and expect us to be okay with it?)
Game mode options for casual/casual is overhauled entirely/Blizzard admits in no uncertain terms they don't care about the player experience.
This is exactly my problem as well. I was quite happy with the 70 packs for 50, and kinda figured this was going to be standard, cause why else would they up the number of packs? I was well disappointed when I discovered it was going to be 50 for 50 again.
I once took a closer look at the tables of pack opening statistics myself and then analysed roughly 1400 packs. I could have done more, but honestly, I did this all in one day and then I was a bit dried out, so bear with me that it's a not a huge number.
Anyway, what I did was to measure the average dust/pack value in blocks of 50 packs. My main problem with the numbers on the wiki was, that they all looked at very large numbers of pack openings, like people opening several hundred or thousand packs. Most players don't open thousands of packs. A more realistic number of packs seemed to me to be 50, since that's the amount you get from a pre-order.
As a result, many of these 50-blocks were under 100 dust per pack. And those that were at or above 100 ususally featured at least 4 or more legendaries or golden epics (400+ packs), which is alreay considered to be above average (1 in 20, 2.5 in 50). And of course, what really skews the results, are golden Legendaries since, as is said, one is already raising the average amount for 50 packs by over 30.
Almost every single block of 50 had 25 or more 40 dust packs. Only one had 24. To give a general idea (no exact numbers here yet), about 35 packs were under 100, and another 10-12 were between 100 and 180.So, it really came down to the best 4 or 5 packs in a block to determine whether it was above or below 100. From a statistical point of view, this is problematic.
If you would try to determine the average temperature in your local region, and found out that the average temperature is about 16°C across the year, but then you had two days where the temperature was 100000°C, while certainly unrealistic, you couldn't really say that the average temperature is far over 100°C across the year. The "average" number is misleading when it is heavily influenced by rare occurences that are far above normal. And that is exactly what happens with packs in Hearthstone. People who claim that the average amount of dust per pack is 100 have to assume, that you open enough packs to get lucky once in a while, preferably with a golden legendary, to end up with that number.
You are absolutly right. That's the reason the median exists in statistics, which everybody seems to forget here. Using the median you get a much accurate estimate if the mean is skewed by very rare and high numbers. I believe the median for packs should be a little above 40, but it would be nice to have a real estimate.
My point is : stop using mean, start using median instead.
Hello folks, I made this calculation and posted it on another thread (here: Activision-Blizzard has gone too far with the Mega Bundle), but it's buried under 14 pages of toxic posting and general misinformation. I think it's an useful tool for those who want to buy a bundle or two, and get an idea of the returned value.
Please don't take it as set in stone as a lot of details regarding pack opening randomness are known only to blizzard itself and the concept of pity timer itself is still somehow aleatory. Below an extract of my original comment (containing the "how to read this" info) and conclusions. Please feel free to correct me or the calculation, this could and wants to be useful to anyone.
"This is a mathematical analysis based on data from Blizzard itself and data on Hearthstone wiki, such as average dust value per pack (102.71) and legendary pity timer set at 40. Keeping in mind that for a new expansion the pity timer is set to an initial value of 10. This analysis keeps the DUST on DOLLARS as a primary unit of measure, since it's the only one that could be applied in this case. Sentimental value for a Hero pic or a card back cannot be quantified and I believe that if someone WANTS that hero, he'll get it anyway.
I also used a theoretical NON GOLD legendary card value as a unit for the pity timer, since it's impossible to calculate the chances of getting a golden legendary, and it's only a plus when it happens.
Please see the attached image, I'm willing to share the google spreadsheet file to anyone.
TL:DR: Blizzard is going far yes...in giving you a great offer. Buying 130 cards from them from these bundles you're getting not only a hero, but a dust/$ value of 151.29 dust per dollar VS a 68.70 dust per dollar value if you buy an individual pack."
I think most of the playerbase will have at least 1k gold saved up for the new expansion, and there are usually some extra packs to be earned around the release as well. To be fair, the 10-pack special pity timers not be considered for the bundles, as most people would get that triggered anyway.
Also, yes, the bundles are good compared to the normal price for packs. The problem for most players is that the prices for normal packs are so unreasonable to begin with the bundle discounts and bonuses do not make up for it. It is a bit like selling a normal cup og coffee for $20 and then calling coffee+a cookie for $18 during morning hours an amazing value offer.
Can you calculate the "beginners bundle" and "standard year 2-of each pack" bundles as well?
Trying to coax people into spending as much as possible is generally deemed unethical.
Snip
Considering that Hearthstone already works by a lootbox system
Snip
Just some small corrections/comments here: trying to convince your customers to spend more money is what all salespeople in every field do for a living. And all marketers I suppose. It's the nature of retail. You are showing people that by spending more money you are getting more value, and therefore spending the money is good for both parties. This is normal, not unethical. Unethical behavior is trying to deceive people into thinking they'd be better off when they wouldn't, like payday lenders who prey on the needy, or people who market inaccurately. If Blizzard had marketed the big bundle as giving you a hero when you actually had a 1% chance to open one then you'd have a point. As it is, spending more gives you more packs, which you can, entirely at your discretion, turn into cards you want by dusting,, or open cards you want, etc.
That leads me to point two. Calling the system a "lootbox" system ignores a number of important points. Firstly the dust system; the more packs you open, you are GUARANTEED to eventually get the cards you want because you can dust the cards you get and make the card you want. Sure, we can argue on the value, but the analysis here was done entirely on dust value (and yes there is variance but eventually you will get to the average value. That's how statistics work). Secondly, 'boosters' have been a part of collectible card games for a very long time (possibly forever, certainly since MTG in the early 90s and I'm not sure any came before). Sure, you can buy individual cards but a single top card will go for FAR more than you will buy a full T1 HS deck for. And you can't get any of them for free like HS. Nor can you play nearly as much.
And finally, if we're defining a "whale" as anyone who would spend $130 on a computer game then every single AAA game sold caters 100% to 'whales', and if we expand this definition to people who will spend over $130 on something they enjoy then it also will include most people who go to sports matches, and who play sport or dance competitively, and people who go out every weekend drinking etc etc etc. Smokers? HUGE whales. I could go on. Ever spend $100 in a shop on something you like? Computer keyboard? How much did your monitor cost? Graphics card? Man, you're a mega-whale. So the word isn't really fit for purpose, and is really only serving as unnecessary hyperbole in a thread about facts and figures.
Nice post.
Spending a dollar-a-day on a hobby isn't exactly a huge financial burden for a lot of folks. If the Mega Bundle becomes the new norm, then it amounts to an expenditure of $80 every four months - a lot less than a dollar-a-day. The game remains F2P, and an everyday player will be able to open a lot more than 80 packs every four months from all the gold they "earn" simply by playing the game - so there really isn't much to the complaint that HS is too expensive.
As far as "cosmetics shouldn't be hidden behind a pay-wall" - if anything, it's remarkable that the allegedly greedy bastards who run the company haven't crammed their online store with heroes, emotes, sprays, card backs, alternate art or any other sort of cosmetic you can think of. Instead, putative "whales" are strictly limited to purchasing packs, or three cosmetics. All the rest of the cosmetics have been released as part of one promotion or another - or simply as a "thank you" from Blizz to the community for playing their game, including two heroes, and a card back every month. Pretty greedy. If any of the critics can offer a better reason than "I just want it - for free" to why Blizz shouldn't make more cosmetics available for purchase, no one I'm aware of has bothered to suggest any . . .
I'm on team mean, the issue with both the median and the mode is that those ones are actually far too low because of the high amount of 40 dust packs. 40 dust is a realistic expectation when opening 1 pack but not a realistic value to attribute to the average value in a bundle.
In statistical terms, the argument is the distribution of packs is a chi-square distribution rather than a normal distribution, but I would argue that that only means smaller samples are more inaccurate, the expected value per pack is still the same before opening, especially when comparing larger bundles. If you are worried that the off chance of a golden legendary is too low, then remove those packs from your sample and work with that average.
For the sake of argument, fill in 40 as your expected value. The value of the 20 packs in the 20 bonuspacks in the WW bundle only amounts to 800, while you know there have been 2 epics, maybe more and the chance of a legendary is pretty decent. You see that it doesn't hold.
Also, in the first 10 packs of every expansion that you open you have at least one guaranteed legendary.
Blizzard shop has a different conversion in my country (values are commonly rounded down, thank you blizz!) so it's 50 packs for 25.000 CLP (it should be 32.650 CLP at the current 1 USD = 653 CLP conversion) and 80 packs for 39.990 CLP (it should be 52.240 CLP at the current 1 USD = 653 CLP conversion). It's convenient in any way.
25.000/50 is 500 CLP per pack, which is 0,77 USD per pack
39.990/80 is 499,8 CLP per pack, which 0,76 USD per pack
We also have to consider the card back, the golden legendary, the hero skin and a "mandatory" legendary within the first 10 packs. For me, the Mega Bundle is DEFINITELY worth it.
Can you link me your blizzard shop site address? I want cheap bundles
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Skidaddle skidoodle your Milhouse manastorm is now a noodle
I have a similar table, and I come to about the same conclusions.
Also maybe interesting, by my calculations, based in part on empirical evidence and roughly assuming an epic every five packs and a legendary every twenty on average, after opening 130 packs you can expect to have all commons, 90+% rares, about half of the epics and 8 legendary, with some 5000 dust to spare (assuming you dust all golden cards of which yuo have two regular copies).
The free golden legendaries more or less makes up for the 20 extra packs of the WW bundle, but you do lose some dust and might be missing slightly more rares in the end.
Blizzard shop has a different conversion in my country (values are commonly rounded down, thank you blizz!) so it's 50 packs for 25.000 CLP (it should be 32.650 CLP at the current 1 USD = 653 CLP conversion) and 80 packs for 39.990 CLP (it should be 52.240 CLP at the current 1 USD = 653 CLP conversion). It's convenient in any way.
25.000/50 is 500 CLP per pack, which is 0,77 USD per pack
39.990/80 is 499,8 CLP per pack, which 0,76 USD per pack
We also have to consider the card back, the golden legendary, the hero skin and a "mandatory" legendary within the first 10 packs. For me, the Mega Bundle is DEFINITELY worth it.
Can you link me your blizzard shop site address? I want cheap bundles
I think it's the same page everyone can see. They just automatically translate all text and prices according to your country.
Well done, nice calculations. Looking at it, looks like buying the double preorder is a great deal and better value than buying preorder + 60 packs of WW.
I usually go for preorder and 60 packs, so this is a win for me. Plus getting two golden legendaries outside of the pack opening when opening 130 packs is imo better too.
Thanks for the amazing feedback. I read through every post and I'll respond accurately asap. I'll also update the table with the data you requested and the other dust averages as well.
This weekend girlfriend is in town so I won't promise miracles but I'll try my best.
I'll also try and understand the currencies/taxes topic and elaborate further.
Please PM me any reliable source you may have that can help me on this (dust per pack calculations, KK and previous bundles prices, international taxes on digital goods etc.). That would be much appreciated and will contribute to the topic.
I believe you are wrong in calculation. These “theoretical legendaries” are already included in the 102 dust per pack so you should remve them. Only pack dust value plus golden legendary dust. Also, theoretically, 70 packs vs 50 packs are better because you will have more commons and rares but this is a matter of discission.
I know that. I just don't like this figure since it's misleading.
I once took a closer look at the tables of pack opening statistics myself and then analysed roughly 1400 packs. I could have done more, but honestly, I did this all in one day and then I was a bit dried out, so bear with me that it's a not a huge number.
Anyway, what I did was to measure the average dust/pack value in blocks of 50 packs. My main problem with the numbers on the wiki was, that they all looked at very large numbers of pack openings, like people opening several hundred or thousand packs. Most players don't open thousands of packs. A more realistic number of packs seemed to me to be 50, since that's the amount you get from a pre-order.
As a result, many of these 50-blocks were under 100 dust per pack. And those that were at or above 100 ususally featured at least 4 or more legendaries or golden epics (400+ packs), which is alreay considered to be above average (1 in 20, 2.5 in 50). And of course, what really skews the results, are golden Legendaries since, as is said, one is already raising the average amount for 50 packs by over 30.
Almost every single block of 50 had 25 or more 40 dust packs. Only one had 24. To give a general idea (no exact numbers here yet), about 35 packs were under 100, and another 10-12 were between 100 and 180.So, it really came down to the best 4 or 5 packs in a block to determine whether it was above or below 100. From a statistical point of view, this is problematic.
If you would try to determine the average temperature in your local region, and found out that the average temperature is about 16°C across the year, but then you had two days where the temperature was 100000°C, while certainly unrealistic, you couldn't really say that the average temperature is far over 100°C across the year. The "average" number is misleading when it is heavily influenced by rare occurences that are far above normal. And that is exactly what happens with packs in Hearthstone. People who claim that the average amount of dust per pack is 100 have to assume, that you open enough packs to get lucky once in a while, preferably with a golden legendary, to end up with that number.
Most people open less packs, have less of a chance to get that lucky, and are more likely to end up with about 92 dust per pack, or even less. .
nice post
this deserve a place at page 1 instead that whine thread
You have a good point for your opinion, cassetto. But if we compare the WW 50$ vs BB 50$ I think there's more real dust value in that extra packs considering that you might open up some cards that you would otherwise enchant, am I right? Of course there's just a chance that you would like and want the extra cards. Unfortunately we can't calculate that, but I hope you get my point. There would be some extra value in the extra 20 packs we got in WW.
Your chart proves that WW deal was a little better then the usual, this one too. The "price increase" (I'm only looking on DUST per $) isn't as bad as they (we) say, but there is a slight price increase. I think that is outrageous considering the circumstances (MTG Arena), you think that's great, well this are just human preferences and it's no point on disagreeing in that, we are all free people after all.
P.S If you want to make blizzard a favor add a K&K line in your excel.
Just some small corrections/comments here: trying to convince your customers to spend more money is what all salespeople in every field do for a living. And all marketers I suppose. It's the nature of retail. You are showing people that by spending more money you are getting more value, and therefore spending the money is good for both parties. This is normal, not unethical. Unethical behavior is trying to deceive people into thinking they'd be better off when they wouldn't, like payday lenders who prey on the needy, or people who market inaccurately. If Blizzard had marketed the big bundle as giving you a hero when you actually had a 1% chance to open one then you'd have a point. As it is, spending more gives you more packs, which you can, entirely at your discretion, turn into cards you want by dusting,, or open cards you want, etc.
That leads me to point two. Calling the system a "lootbox" system ignores a number of important points. Firstly the dust system; the more packs you open, you are GUARANTEED to eventually get the cards you want because you can dust the cards you get and make the card you want. Sure, we can argue on the value, but the analysis here was done entirely on dust value (and yes there is variance but eventually you will get to the average value. That's how statistics work). Secondly, 'boosters' have been a part of collectible card games for a very long time (possibly forever, certainly since MTG in the early 90s and I'm not sure any came before). Sure, you can buy individual cards but a single top card will go for FAR more than you will buy a full T1 HS deck for. And you can't get any of them for free like HS. Nor can you play nearly as much.
And finally, if we're defining a "whale" as anyone who would spend $130 on a computer game then every single AAA game sold caters 100% to 'whales', and if we expand this definition to people who will spend over $130 on something they enjoy then it also will include most people who go to sports matches, and who play sport or dance competitively, and people who go out every weekend drinking etc etc etc. Smokers? HUGE whales. I could go on. Ever spend $100 in a shop on something you like? Computer keyboard? How much did your monitor cost? Graphics card? Man, you're a mega-whale. So the word isn't really fit for purpose, and is really only serving as unnecessary hyperbole in a thread about facts and figures.
It's obvious that the bundles are much more convenient than buying packs. It's the reason why bundles exist (other than milking money from customers of course xD). Thank you for the analysis but it seems pretty logical to me (as it is logical that 70 packs for 50$ are better than 50 for the same price).
Top deck is cheat
This is exactly my problem as well. I was quite happy with the 70 packs for 50, and kinda figured this was going to be standard, cause why else would they up the number of packs?
I was well disappointed when I discovered it was going to be 50 for 50 again.
You still get the free leg and if you buy both bundles you can get up to 3 yes
Top deck is cheat
Why is the price same for € and dollar? 50 and 80...80 bucks= 68,8 €
You are absolutly right. That's the reason the median exists in statistics, which everybody seems to forget here. Using the median you get a much accurate estimate if the mean is skewed by very rare and high numbers. I believe the median for packs should be a little above 40, but it would be nice to have a real estimate.
My point is : stop using mean, start using median instead.
I think most of the playerbase will have at least 1k gold saved up for the new expansion, and there are usually some extra packs to be earned around the release as well. To be fair, the 10-pack special pity timers not be considered for the bundles, as most people would get that triggered anyway.
Also, yes, the bundles are good compared to the normal price for packs. The problem for most players is that the prices for normal packs are so unreasonable to begin with the bundle discounts and bonuses do not make up for it. It is a bit like selling a normal cup og coffee for $20 and then calling coffee+a cookie for $18 during morning hours an amazing value offer.
Can you calculate the "beginners bundle" and "standard year 2-of each pack" bundles as well?
Editor of the Heartpwn Legendary Crafting Guide:
https://www.hearthpwn.com/forums/hearthstone-general/card-discussion/205920-legendary-tier-list-crafting-guide
Nice post.
Spending a dollar-a-day on a hobby isn't exactly a huge financial burden for a lot of folks. If the Mega Bundle becomes the new norm, then it amounts to an expenditure of $80 every four months - a lot less than a dollar-a-day. The game remains F2P, and an everyday player will be able to open a lot more than 80 packs every four months from all the gold they "earn" simply by playing the game - so there really isn't much to the complaint that HS is too expensive.
As far as "cosmetics shouldn't be hidden behind a pay-wall" - if anything, it's remarkable that the allegedly greedy bastards who run the company haven't crammed their online store with heroes, emotes, sprays, card backs, alternate art or any other sort of cosmetic you can think of. Instead, putative "whales" are strictly limited to purchasing packs, or three cosmetics. All the rest of the cosmetics have been released as part of one promotion or another - or simply as a "thank you" from Blizz to the community for playing their game, including two heroes, and a card back every month. Pretty greedy. If any of the critics can offer a better reason than "I just want it - for free" to why Blizz shouldn't make more cosmetics available for purchase, no one I'm aware of has bothered to suggest any . . .
Also, in the first 10 packs of every expansion that you open you have at least one guaranteed legendary.
Sorry, didn't read the whole comment.
Can you link me your blizzard shop site address? I want cheap bundles
Skidaddle skidoodle your Milhouse manastorm is now a noodle
Nice work.
I have a similar table, and I come to about the same conclusions.
Also maybe interesting, by my calculations, based in part on empirical evidence and roughly assuming an epic every five packs and a legendary every twenty on average, after opening 130 packs you can expect to have all commons, 90+% rares, about half of the epics and 8 legendary, with some 5000 dust to spare (assuming you dust all golden cards of which yuo have two regular copies).
The free golden legendaries more or less makes up for the 20 extra packs of the WW bundle, but you do lose some dust and might be missing slightly more rares in the end.
I think it's the same page everyone can see. They just automatically translate all text and prices according to your country.
https://us.shop.battle.net/es-es/product/hearthstone-boomsday-project
Well done, nice calculations. Looking at it, looks like buying the double preorder is a great deal and better value than buying preorder + 60 packs of WW.
I usually go for preorder and 60 packs, so this is a win for me. Plus getting two golden legendaries outside of the pack opening when opening 130 packs is imo better too.
Folks!
Thanks for the amazing feedback. I read through every post and I'll respond accurately asap. I'll also update the table with the data you requested and the other dust averages as well.
This weekend girlfriend is in town so I won't promise miracles but I'll try my best.
I'll also try and understand the currencies/taxes topic and elaborate further.
Please PM me any reliable source you may have that can help me on this (dust per pack calculations, KK and previous bundles prices, international taxes on digital goods etc.). That would be much appreciated and will contribute to the topic.
I believe you are wrong in calculation. These “theoretical legendaries” are already included in the 102 dust per pack so you should remve them. Only pack dust value plus golden legendary dust. Also, theoretically, 70 packs vs 50 packs are better because you will have more commons and rares but this is a matter of discission.
--Alfi--
What an absolute shill thread. If you spend 130€ on pre-ordering loot boxes, you have a problem.