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 127.34 dust per dollar VS a 68.70 dust per dollar value if you buy an (1) individual pack."
Edit 07/16/2018: Removed the dust gain for the theoretically unpacked legendaries. As stated by MaximGorkijthe dust obtained from those cards is included in the average dust value per pack. Thanks for the tip my friend!
Cheers for the chart. The value changes a bit, depending on location, but it all should be mostly relative.
The odd thing for us, in Australia, is that the 80 pack bundle works out at $1.375 per pack, whereas the 50 pack bundle is $1.34 per pack. I'm not going to lose sleep over 3 and a half cents, but it still seems odd that it doesn't convert the same way as the US differences. If anything, it seems more odd that it's cheaper, per booster pack, to buy the smaller bundle. I don't care for aesthetic options, but I'm guessing that as a nation, we must. That, or Blizzard are a funny mob.
So, can we all agree that the Boomsday Bundle is better than the Witchwood Bundle?
The chart shows the Witchwood bundle the best deal Blizzard has offered to date, by far, if you discount the value of the hero. If the value of the hero is added, Boomsday is still slightly worse, but not too much so.
It is worth mentioning that these are all based on averages, and you could hit a spell of bad luck on your pack openings. The gold Legendary is guaranteed at least, and if you don't dust it (like me, because I collect all the cards) it is a pretty sweet offer, since that is 40 less packs I will "NEED" to open to get the full set.
So, can we all agree that the Boomsday Bundle is better than the Witchwood Bundle?
WW it's still the best Dust per Dollar value so far, with a base difference (non calculating the $10 hero value) of 20 dust less per dollar spent. BUT if you really like the new hero it's a fair deal.
It's more important to know that it's an astounding deal VS the daily purchases for the standard price. You'll get 71 dust more per dollar spent . It's a 50% off the market standard price.
The dust/pack average is already a premise that you better take a closer look at, if you give anything about statistics.
Aside from that, 1 single golden Legendary alone already raises the average dust value of 50 packs by over 30. So, it's no surprise that this makes the deal a lot better. And of course, these special pre-order offerings are better deals than regular purchases; that's their entire point, and everyone understands that. More packs and stuff per dollar is always good.
People are not upset about the bundle perhaps not being worth it. They are upset about the bundle containing something desirable (Mecha-Jaraxxus) exclusively at a relatively hefty price point, that they think should be available to more people. In addition to that, they have the impression that Blizzard is intentionally providing more and better deals to people who are willing to spend even more money, that way catering more towards the "whales", which is, generally speaking, an alarm sign in video games. Take, for example, a look Square-Enix or Ubisoft to see, where these tendencies can go.
I'm sorry if I sound aggressive here. I mean, it's cool of you to have calculated this and showing these results. But my impression is, that this kind of misses the point of the debate, and the results themselves are not exactly unexpected.
So, can we all agree that the Boomsday Bundle is better than the Witchwood Bundle?
WW it's still the best Dust per Dollar value so far, with a base difference (non calculating the $10 hero value) of 20 dust less per dollar spent. BUT if you really like the new hero it's a fair deal.
It's more important to know that it's an astounding deal VS the daily purchases for the standard price. You'll get 71 dust more per dollar spent . It's a 50% off the market standard price.
It's misleading to base your headline comparison on the dust value of buying 2 packs. The 60 packs option is always available - and comes closest in terms of monetary outlay - so that is the baseline that should be compared to (I know you do it in the spreadsheet but you are citing the wrong comparison in your text).
Is there a reason tax was not included in the math? If it isn't needed then I am curious to know why.
Very good question. I MAY BE WRONG (please someone with more expertise correct me if I am) but tax rates depends on the State you're living in. This is a chart based on US dollars and US market.
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.
The dust/pack average is already a premise that you better take a closer look at, if you give anything about statistics.
Aside from that, 1 single golden Legendary alone already raises the average dust value of 50 packs by over 30. So, it's no surprise that this makes the deal a lot better. And of course, these special pre-order offerings are better deals than regular purchases; that's their entire point, and everyone understands that. More packs and stuff per dollar is always good.
People are not upset about the bundle perhaps not being worth it. They are upset about the bundle containing something desirable (Mecha-Jaraxxus) exclusively at a relatively hefty price point, that they think should be available to more people. In addition to that, they have the impression that Blizzard is intentionally providing more and better deals to people who are willing to spend even more money, that way catering more towards the "whales", which is, generally speaking, an alarm sign in video games. Take, for example, a look Square-Enix or Ubisoft to see, where these tendencies can go.
I'm sorry if I sound aggressive here. I mean, it's cool of you to have calculated this and showing these results. But my impression is, that this kind of misses the point of the debate, and the results themselves are not exactly unexpected.
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)
The hero is a bonus that can or cannot, based on your preferences, make a difference on the table. If you consider the hero a value then use the last column. As stated, the sentimental value is not considered in this topic, because it's individual. I care, you don't, for example. Also this is an analysis based on a NOT F2P model of play. The "political" debate over the inclusion of the hero on the top tier pack could have right points on both sides. One side would like to have the hero for free or for a cheaper price, the other side would like to have that "exclusiveness" feeling of having the top tier cool stuff. We can argue forever on this, but at the end of the day it's a Blizzard decision.
No worries, you don't sound aggressive, the point is, there's no debate here, just data for those who wants to buy bundles basing their decisions on the "real" (dust) value and not sentimental/political stances on blizzard or video games industry in general.
I personally think that, if you're a player that would like to play standard ranked and achieve good results, the 130 packs combo bundle is an amazing deal to score. Hero or not hero.
So, can we all agree that the Boomsday Bundle is better than the Witchwood Bundle?
WW it's still the best Dust per Dollar value so far, with a base difference (non calculating the $10 hero value) of 20 dust less per dollar spent. BUT if you really like the new hero it's a fair deal.
It's more important to know that it's an astounding deal VS the daily purchases for the standard price. You'll get 71 dust more per dollar spent . It's a 50% off the market standard price.
It's misleading to base your headline comparison on the dust value of buying 2 packs. The 60 packs option is always available - and comes closest in terms of monetary outlay - so that is the baseline that should be compared to (I know you do it in the spreadsheet but you are citing the wrong comparison in your text).
True, I just made an example using, as I said, the "standard" pack price as a baseline. The 60 packs option could be seen as a bundle itself and certainly is closer to the new expansions' bundles. That's why I included all the purchasing "standard" deals available on the Blizzard website.
It's a very fascinating topic to me (I'm a business analyst) and I truly appreciate the fine tuning that's behind Blizzard's business models.
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.
Nice! and good for you guys!
Shoot me a pm if you want the template of the spreadsheet. For your last statement, I did consider the golden Legendary in the value and the 10 packs pity timer for a new expansion (columns 6 to 9). Those are bringing up the final value a lot.
Also if you're lucky enough to get a golden legendary out of the opnenings, well, that's a VERY high rise in value.
People are not upset about the bundle perhaps not being worth it. They are upset about the bundle containing something desirable (Mecha-Jaraxxus) exclusively at a relatively hefty price point, that they think should be available to more people. In addition to that, they have the impression that Blizzard is intentionally providing more and better deals to people who are willing to spend even more money, that way catering more towards the "whales", which is, generally speaking, an alarm sign in video games. Take, for example, a look Square-Enix or Ubisoft to see, where these tendencies can go.
To preface my comment, I agree that the reason people are upset has less to do with the value of the promotion and more to do with the exclusivity of Mecha-Jaraxxus. (Personally, I believe this is a perfectly reasonable way for Blizzard to market the $80 bundle, but that's not really what I want to discuss, as per my bold-facing in your quote.)
To me, what you're calling "catering more toward the 'whales'" is just basic economics and marketing. No one is alarmed by the fact that standard pack pricing results in getting more per dollar as the overall price point goes up (2 for $3 means $1.50 per pack, 7 for $10 means about $1.43 per pack, and so on). Those basic pack bundles are quite literally better deals (per pack) for anyone willing to spend more money, and no one is ever up in arms about it*. In fact, this type of tiered promotion structure (i.e. the more you spend the more you save) is common across the retail industry and no one bats an eye.
I appreciate the concerns around a "free to play" game going too far into the "pay to win" space, but I think that's a debate that needs to be had around other topics, such as fair matchmaking and alternative modes of play which are less dependent on having a complete collection. (For the latter, I'm thinking of things like in-game tournament mode where you can play against your friends - who presumably have similar collections - or the deck sharing for friendly matches if your and your friends collections are unequal.)
*The topic of "is hearthstone too expensive" is a common one, but here I'm referring to this principle of "spend more to save more," which is never debated in the context of basic pack bundles.
To me, what you're calling "catering more toward the 'whales'" is just basic economics and marketing. [...] In fact, this type of tiered promotion structure (i.e. the more you spend the more you save) is common across the retail industry and no one bats an eye.
[...]
*The topic of "is hearthstone too expensive" is a common one, but here I'm referring to this principle of "spend more to save more," which is never debated in the context of basic pack bundles.
In theory, I agree that the principle of offering better deals to big buyers is neither new nor problematic. And it's been in Hearthstone for quite some time. The 60 packs bundle was always providing a significant discout over the 2 packs. But this here is different, I would say.
The pre-order deals are one-time offerings; meaning, that you only got this special discount on 50 packs once. Those who want to spend more than that had to go with the regular prices. However, now you can additionally buy 80 for 80. Those who have enough money to spare, get a special deal for 80 or 130 packs instead of just 50.
This makes the game more attractiive only to people who want to spend more. Simple question: Where is a special offering to people who would rather spend less, let's say a 30 for 30 deal? Why make the bundles not mutually exclusive instead? Why add Mecha-Jaraxxus only to the 80 bundle?
When a game publisher focuses more on those who spend more, instead of providing different deals to different customers and trying to make the game more attractive to everyone, it can feel like, and sometimes has meant, that they give up on the product, like squeezing all remaining juice out of an apple that is about to rot. Also, when they try to increase their revenue on pre-orders, as in making more money with a product they haven't even released yet, it gives people a bad feeling about the quality of the product. Finally, the pricing structure that counts on "whales" is questionable by itself: Trying to coax people into spending as much as possible is generally deemed unethical. It's not providing fair deals to people with more money, it's manipulating people to spend more than is reasonable. Considering that Hearthstone already works by a lootbox system (though I think it's not quite as problematic as other games that turned this into a dirty word), any more attempts to "harvest" on players with bad spending habits don't feel like the devoloper cares much about the integrity of their product. And since the "cost" of Hearthstone has been a controversy for quite some time already, especially after the release schedule moved to 3 expansions per year, this comes at a bad time.
Anyway, the table gives a good comparison on what you get from what pack bundle, and that I do not mean to question. I guess it was mostly the final note that irritated me, as if it meant to say "stop complaining, this is a great deal". I mean, the deal is great to those who want to buy a lot of packs. But think, the debate that is going on about the Mega-Bundle is still warranted and necessary.
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 127.34 dust per dollar VS a 68.70 dust per dollar value if you buy an (1) individual pack."
Edit 07/16/2018: Removed the dust gain for the theoretically unpacked legendaries. As stated by MaximGorkij the dust obtained from those cards is included in the average dust value per pack. Thanks for the tip my friend!
Thanks for taking the time to calculate this, useful information.
So, can we all agree that the Boomsday Bundle is better than the Witchwood Bundle?
Cheers for the chart. The value changes a bit, depending on location, but it all should be mostly relative.
The odd thing for us, in Australia, is that the 80 pack bundle works out at $1.375 per pack, whereas the 50 pack bundle is $1.34 per pack. I'm not going to lose sleep over 3 and a half cents, but it still seems odd that it doesn't convert the same way as the US differences. If anything, it seems more odd that it's cheaper, per booster pack, to buy the smaller bundle. I don't care for aesthetic options, but I'm guessing that as a nation, we must. That, or Blizzard are a funny mob.
Nice work. People like to complain, so it's good to have a voice of reason.
The chart shows the Witchwood bundle the best deal Blizzard has offered to date, by far, if you discount the value of the hero. If the value of the hero is added, Boomsday is still slightly worse, but not too much so.
It is worth mentioning that these are all based on averages, and you could hit a spell of bad luck on your pack openings. The gold Legendary is guaranteed at least, and if you don't dust it (like me, because I collect all the cards) it is a pretty sweet offer, since that is 40 less packs I will "NEED" to open to get the full set.
Great work! You've inspired me to do one in my local currency. Cheers, fellow spreadsheet-holic.
WW it's still the best Dust per Dollar value so far, with a base difference (non calculating the $10 hero value) of 20 dust less per dollar spent. BUT if you really like the new hero it's a fair deal.
It's more important to know that it's an astounding deal VS the daily purchases for the standard price. You'll get 71 dust more per dollar spent . It's a 50% off the market standard price.
Let me know if you need the google spreadsheet template ;)
Is there a reason tax was not included in the math? If it isn't needed then I am curious to know why.
The dust/pack average is already a premise that you better take a closer look at, if you give anything about statistics.
Aside from that, 1 single golden Legendary alone already raises the average dust value of 50 packs by over 30. So, it's no surprise that this makes the deal a lot better. And of course, these special pre-order offerings are better deals than regular purchases; that's their entire point, and everyone understands that. More packs and stuff per dollar is always good.
People are not upset about the bundle perhaps not being worth it. They are upset about the bundle containing something desirable (Mecha-Jaraxxus) exclusively at a relatively hefty price point, that they think should be available to more people. In addition to that, they have the impression that Blizzard is intentionally providing more and better deals to people who are willing to spend even more money, that way catering more towards the "whales", which is, generally speaking, an alarm sign in video games. Take, for example, a look Square-Enix or Ubisoft to see, where these tendencies can go.
I'm sorry if I sound aggressive here. I mean, it's cool of you to have calculated this and showing these results. But my impression is, that this kind of misses the point of the debate, and the results themselves are not exactly unexpected.
It's misleading to base your headline comparison on the dust value of buying 2 packs. The 60 packs option is always available - and comes closest in terms of monetary outlay - so that is the baseline that should be compared to (I know you do it in the spreadsheet but you are citing the wrong comparison in your text).
Very good question. I MAY BE WRONG (please someone with more expertise correct me if I am) but tax rates depends on the State you're living in. This is a chart based on US dollars and US market.
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.
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)
The hero is a bonus that can or cannot, based on your preferences, make a difference on the table. If you consider the hero a value then use the last column. As stated, the sentimental value is not considered in this topic, because it's individual. I care, you don't, for example. Also this is an analysis based on a NOT F2P model of play.
The "political" debate over the inclusion of the hero on the top tier pack could have right points on both sides. One side would like to have the hero for free or for a cheaper price, the other side would like to have that "exclusiveness" feeling of having the top tier cool stuff. We can argue forever on this, but at the end of the day it's a Blizzard decision.
No worries, you don't sound aggressive, the point is, there's no debate here, just data for those who wants to buy bundles basing their decisions on the "real" (dust) value and not sentimental/political stances on blizzard or video games industry in general.
I personally think that, if you're a player that would like to play standard ranked and achieve good results, the 130 packs combo bundle is an amazing deal to score. Hero or not hero.
True, I just made an example using, as I said, the "standard" pack price as a baseline. The 60 packs option could be seen as a bundle itself and certainly is closer to the new expansions' bundles. That's why I included all the purchasing "standard" deals available on the Blizzard website.
It's a very fascinating topic to me (I'm a business analyst) and I truly appreciate the fine tuning that's behind Blizzard's business models.
Nice! and good for you guys!
Shoot me a pm if you want the template of the spreadsheet. For your last statement, I did consider the golden Legendary in the value and the 10 packs pity timer for a new expansion (columns 6 to 9). Those are bringing up the final value a lot.
Also if you're lucky enough to get a golden legendary out of the opnenings, well, that's a VERY high rise in value.
To preface my comment, I agree that the reason people are upset has less to do with the value of the promotion and more to do with the exclusivity of Mecha-Jaraxxus. (Personally, I believe this is a perfectly reasonable way for Blizzard to market the $80 bundle, but that's not really what I want to discuss, as per my bold-facing in your quote.)
To me, what you're calling "catering more toward the 'whales'" is just basic economics and marketing. No one is alarmed by the fact that standard pack pricing results in getting more per dollar as the overall price point goes up (2 for $3 means $1.50 per pack, 7 for $10 means about $1.43 per pack, and so on). Those basic pack bundles are quite literally better deals (per pack) for anyone willing to spend more money, and no one is ever up in arms about it*. In fact, this type of tiered promotion structure (i.e. the more you spend the more you save) is common across the retail industry and no one bats an eye.
I appreciate the concerns around a "free to play" game going too far into the "pay to win" space, but I think that's a debate that needs to be had around other topics, such as fair matchmaking and alternative modes of play which are less dependent on having a complete collection. (For the latter, I'm thinking of things like in-game tournament mode where you can play against your friends - who presumably have similar collections - or the deck sharing for friendly matches if your and your friends collections are unequal.)
*The topic of "is hearthstone too expensive" is a common one, but here I'm referring to this principle of "spend more to save more," which is never debated in the context of basic pack bundles.
In theory, I agree that the principle of offering better deals to big buyers is neither new nor problematic. And it's been in Hearthstone for quite some time. The 60 packs bundle was always providing a significant discout over the 2 packs. But this here is different, I would say.
The pre-order deals are one-time offerings; meaning, that you only got this special discount on 50 packs once. Those who want to spend more than that had to go with the regular prices. However, now you can additionally buy 80 for 80. Those who have enough money to spare, get a special deal for 80 or 130 packs instead of just 50.
This makes the game more attractiive only to people who want to spend more. Simple question: Where is a special offering to people who would rather spend less, let's say a 30 for 30 deal? Why make the bundles not mutually exclusive instead? Why add Mecha-Jaraxxus only to the 80 bundle?
When a game publisher focuses more on those who spend more, instead of providing different deals to different customers and trying to make the game more attractive to everyone, it can feel like, and sometimes has meant, that they give up on the product, like squeezing all remaining juice out of an apple that is about to rot. Also, when they try to increase their revenue on pre-orders, as in making more money with a product they haven't even released yet, it gives people a bad feeling about the quality of the product. Finally, the pricing structure that counts on "whales" is questionable by itself: Trying to coax people into spending as much as possible is generally deemed unethical. It's not providing fair deals to people with more money, it's manipulating people to spend more than is reasonable. Considering that Hearthstone already works by a lootbox system (though I think it's not quite as problematic as other games that turned this into a dirty word), any more attempts to "harvest" on players with bad spending habits don't feel like the devoloper cares much about the integrity of their product. And since the "cost" of Hearthstone has been a controversy for quite some time already, especially after the release schedule moved to 3 expansions per year, this comes at a bad time.
Anyway, the table gives a good comparison on what you get from what pack bundle, and that I do not mean to question. I guess it was mostly the final note that irritated me, as if it meant to say "stop complaining, this is a great deal". I mean, the deal is great to those who want to buy a lot of packs. But think, the debate that is going on about the Mega-Bundle is still warranted and necessary.
I'm not giving them another dollar until:
Kaladin's RoS Set Review
Join me at Out of Cards!