So I have been playing HearthStone a good bit recently, and I have been kind of annoyed with the exchange rate between arcane dust and cards, and so I was curious how much arcane dust you would get if you opened $50 worth of packs and disenchanted every single card that you got from them. So I decided to document this process by making a video of it, and I thought if anything it might get some attention and perhaps coax Blizzard to improve their crafting rates; as I think part of the reason some people complain so much about HearthStone being pay to win is because it is so hard to craft the cards you want in the game using packs that you got from daily quests etc. (8 to 1 ratios to me are incredibly excessive.) So long story short, here is the video and I hope you enjoy.
(Did I miss something or do Blood Imps disenchant and craft for equal costs? I noticed that while making this video, and they seem to be the only card that exchanges with arcane dust at a 1 to 1 ratio.)
On a side note, if you agree with me on this issue: I would appreciate you liking the video and perhaps telling others about it; as the more exposure it gets the higher the chance that Blizzard will actually take notice of the thing.
Thumbnail image courtesy of blizzplanet, and music is creative common licensed from Kevin MacLeod/Incompetech.
(Did I miss something or do Blood Imps disenchant and craft for equal costs? I noticed that while making this video, and they seem to be the only card that exchanges with arcane dust at a 1 to 1 ratio.)
Blizzard implemented a system to make card changes less punishing for those that crafted cards, because of their stats. Any card that gets changed (and is craftable) can be disenchanted for its respective full crafting costs for short period of time (2 weeks usually). A nice sideeffect is, you can try out cards in their current iteration at no "real" cost during that period of time. It is also one of the reasons you shouldn't disenchant any cards, because you can, but only if you need to. Even the tiniest change allows you to disenchant at much higher value, especially golden commons are great stuff to dust.
I must admit though, 4K dust out of 40 packs is rather good.
This relates heavily to an article I will be writing up this week about the drop rates but getting 4K dust out of 200 cards is roughly ahead of the curve.
I'll summarise at a high level my stats (article will contain the backing) but drop rates are approximately as follows based on 3575 cards analysed so far:
Legendary: 1.12%
Epic: 4.28%
Rare: 16.45%
Common: 78.15%
In terms of expectations around golden cards the only data I have been able to observe so far but isn't as statistically valid is as follows:
Legendary: No data
Epic: 0.5%
Rare: 1%
Common: 1.5%
The sample size for golden card data is much smaller (200 cards) as not all data collected offered this information hence the caveat. Based on my own experience I have opened 1 golden legendary in about 180 packs (900 cards) but I was not tracking data at this point.
The point being, based on those expected drop rates you would be expecting to see in 40 packs:
2 Plain Legendary :: 0 Golden Legendary (800 dust)
Yeah that was kind of my point with all of this: the exchange rate on dust to cards is ridiculous. When you first start playing the game, depending on your class, you do not have a single silence available to you. You need at least some form of silence to deal with certain types of decks; as it is the most effective way of neutralizing them. 4000 dust over 200 cards means you are on average getting 20 dust per a card (and as you said that seems to be running above the average you have observed). That means to get three silences (the number I am currently running in my deck) you must either get them as drops (in 40 packs I think I got 3 or 4), or you must craft them and that takes something like 2-3 cards each. Now this of course assumes you don't want any of the rare cards that might drop, at which point if you are using commons it is going to take 8 cards to craft another common, or one new common for every 2 packs. (Assuming of course you get 4 commons and one rare or better.) That to me is a ridiculous exchange rate, and it something that blizzard in my opinion needs to address; as common cards should be relatively easy to obtain.
Yeah it is still getting the dust to begin with. I think cards of similar type should be at max a 4 to 1 ratio, and min 2 to 1. Commons should be just that common. Making you exchange 8 for 1 on a card that is not rare makes no sense to me. I just tend to think they did it backwards like that to make it cost prohibitive for you to try and craft a higher tier card using lower end extras.
That to me is a ridiculous exchange rate, and it something that blizzard in my opinion needs to address; as common cards should be relatively easy to obtain.
I agree here, they could alter crafting costs for commons down to 20, to keep it inline with all other rarities (dust epic, get 100 dust for any rare etc.). But I'm also fine with how Blizzard handles it. The main problem I have with Magic (and tons of other CCG/TCGs) is the sheer amount of commons you get while buying packs to fill up your collection (I have no problems smashing them all on my walls in the shop, and still would have tons of extras). Of course you can argue Magic has the option of Trading, which Hearthstone doesn't (and which I'm fine with), but commons are near worthless. Once you reach your 40+ packs opened, commons become less interesting to open, because you might already have your two copies (in theory you need around 50 packs to get all commons doubled). And 40 packs sounds as an easy obtainable number to me (whether you prefer money or time, or a mix of both).
Crafting is always optional, and definitely not the way to go to get a specific deck, it is inefficient. Efficiency is one of the easier tuneables for F2P Games, but still you try to tune it in a way where the inefficiency gives the customer a reason to actually pay (and in Blizzard's case: prevent doing "too dumb stuff").
TL;DR: It will always be super inefficient to buy packs for dust, and there is a reason for it.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Please report toxic behaviour and unwanted threads, so the moderators can deal with them.
I didn't buy them for dust. I did it to make a point in regards to how inefficient the current system is. And in terms of real world value: no card in hearthstone has any value as it cannot be traded. (Hence part of my issue with the cost of the game.) I like Blizzard a lot, and somewhat famously tried to get a job with them a while back. (Well famously for me anyways lol.) That is in party why I did not mind paying $50 bucks to them even if it was to help illustrate what is wrong with their system. (In a game that has around 400 cards, 200 cards should not be equivalent to 3-4 high end cards.) I just think that HearthStone is a bit too slanted against the free to play player in terms of crafting. If that were better then a lot more cards would be more accessible to players that only want to invest $20 or so into the game; which I think is fine. It would also help to reduce the amount of players complaining about being a pay to win title.
lol No thank you for that. I knew there was some trick to it, but I could not figure out which key it was. (They really should have a tool tip for that.)
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
So I have been playing HearthStone a good bit recently, and I have been kind of annoyed with the exchange rate between arcane dust and cards, and so I was curious how much arcane dust you would get if you opened $50 worth of packs and disenchanted every single card that you got from them. So I decided to document this process by making a video of it, and I thought if anything it might get some attention and perhaps coax Blizzard to improve their crafting rates; as I think part of the reason some people complain so much about HearthStone being pay to win is because it is so hard to craft the cards you want in the game using packs that you got from daily quests etc. (8 to 1 ratios to me are incredibly excessive.) So long story short, here is the video and I hope you enjoy.
(Did I miss something or do Blood Imps disenchant and craft for equal costs? I noticed that while making this video, and they seem to be the only card that exchanges with arcane dust at a 1 to 1 ratio.)
On a side note, if you agree with me on this issue: I would appreciate you liking the video and perhaps telling others about it; as the more exposure it gets the higher the chance that Blizzard will actually take notice of the thing.
Thumbnail image courtesy of blizzplanet, and music is creative common licensed from Kevin MacLeod/Incompetech.
Blizzard implemented a system to make card changes less punishing for those that crafted cards, because of their stats.
Any card that gets changed (and is craftable) can be disenchanted for its respective full crafting costs for short period of time (2 weeks usually).
A nice sideeffect is, you can try out cards in their current iteration at no "real" cost during that period of time.
It is also one of the reasons you shouldn't disenchant any cards, because you can, but only if you need to.
Even the tiniest change allows you to disenchant at much higher value, especially golden commons are great stuff to dust.
I must admit though, 4K dust out of 40 packs is rather good.
Please report toxic behaviour and unwanted threads, so the moderators can deal with them.
This relates heavily to an article I will be writing up this week about the drop rates but getting 4K dust out of 200 cards is roughly ahead of the curve.
I'll summarise at a high level my stats (article will contain the backing) but drop rates are approximately as follows based on 3575 cards analysed so far:
In terms of expectations around golden cards the only data I have been able to observe so far but isn't as statistically valid is as follows:
The sample size for golden card data is much smaller (200 cards) as not all data collected offered this information hence the caveat. Based on my own experience I have opened 1 golden legendary in about 180 packs (900 cards) but I was not tracking data at this point.
The point being, based on those expected drop rates you would be expecting to see in 40 packs:
So overall you can expect about 3310 dust out of 40 cards.
Current fun deck: Yogg-S'Thun Stone
Yeah that was kind of my point with all of this: the exchange rate on dust to cards is ridiculous. When you first start playing the game, depending on your class, you do not have a single silence available to you. You need at least some form of silence to deal with certain types of decks; as it is the most effective way of neutralizing them. 4000 dust over 200 cards means you are on average getting 20 dust per a card (and as you said that seems to be running above the average you have observed). That means to get three silences (the number I am currently running in my deck) you must either get them as drops (in 40 packs I think I got 3 or 4), or you must craft them and that takes something like 2-3 cards each. Now this of course assumes you don't want any of the rare cards that might drop, at which point if you are using commons it is going to take 8 cards to craft another common, or one new common for every 2 packs. (Assuming of course you get 4 commons and one rare or better.) That to me is a ridiculous exchange rate, and it something that blizzard in my opinion needs to address; as common cards should be relatively easy to obtain.
Yeah it is still getting the dust to begin with. I think cards of similar type should be at max a 4 to 1 ratio, and min 2 to 1. Commons should be just that common. Making you exchange 8 for 1 on a card that is not rare makes no sense to me. I just tend to think they did it backwards like that to make it cost prohibitive for you to try and craft a higher tier card using lower end extras.
I agree here, they could alter crafting costs for commons down to 20, to keep it inline with all other rarities (dust epic, get 100 dust for any rare etc.).
But I'm also fine with how Blizzard handles it. The main problem I have with Magic (and tons of other CCG/TCGs) is the sheer amount of commons you get while buying packs to fill up your collection (I have no problems smashing them all on my walls in the shop, and still would have tons of extras). Of course you can argue Magic has the option of Trading, which Hearthstone doesn't (and which I'm fine with), but commons are near worthless.
Once you reach your 40+ packs opened, commons become less interesting to open, because you might already have your two copies (in theory you need around 50 packs to get all commons doubled).
And 40 packs sounds as an easy obtainable number to me (whether you prefer money or time, or a mix of both).
Crafting is always optional, and definitely not the way to go to get a specific deck, it is inefficient. Efficiency is one of the easier tuneables for F2P Games, but still you try to tune it in a way where the inefficiency gives the customer a reason to actually pay (and in Blizzard's case: prevent doing "too dumb stuff").
TL;DR: It will always be super inefficient to buy packs for dust, and there is a reason for it.
Please report toxic behaviour and unwanted threads, so the moderators can deal with them.
I didn't buy them for dust. I did it to make a point in regards to how inefficient the current system is. And in terms of real world value: no card in hearthstone has any value as it cannot be traded. (Hence part of my issue with the cost of the game.) I like Blizzard a lot, and somewhat famously tried to get a job with them a while back. (Well famously for me anyways lol.) That is in party why I did not mind paying $50 bucks to them even if it was to help illustrate what is wrong with their system. (In a game that has around 400 cards, 200 cards should not be equivalent to 3-4 high end cards.) I just think that HearthStone is a bit too slanted against the free to play player in terms of crafting. If that were better then a lot more cards would be more accessible to players that only want to invest $20 or so into the game; which I think is fine. It would also help to reduce the amount of players complaining about being a pay to win title.
lol No thank you for that. I knew there was some trick to it, but I could not figure out which key it was. (They really should have a tool tip for that.)