How are your ONE VG pulls working out for you?

2»

Comments

  • Machine
    Machine Posts: 779 Critical Contributor

    @TheHunter said:

    @QuiksilverHg said:
    Why increase the cost? Mythics are generally more than twice as valuable as rares, so why make the rare more than half the cost of a mythic. Don’t put stupid ideas like that in Oktagon’s head, because they definitely run with them

    You have to give a little to take some back - I bet most players would prefer to pay a bit more to get non-dupe Rare packs. Ask @Machine and their 1st team mate - 4 Koths in a row or pay more for guaranteed new cards?

    That team mate added another Koth to his list. Really insane. I really would like @Oktagon_Support to take this to the developers and / or comment on this. We've seen some great proposals:

    • Remove the ability to pull a mythic from the rare pack and make the rare pack a nondupe (maybe with a SLIGHTLY higher cost.
    • Add some kind of pity counter. After X dupes pulls, you will get a nondupe for free.
    • Any other ideas?

    I'm sure we can safely conclude that the current experience is demotivating and detrimental to the game. We are talking about wasting the game's most precious resource. Spending it should feel rewarding, not punishing.

  • Machine
    Machine Posts: 779 Critical Contributor

    @TheHunter said:
    Time on my hands to think about this at the moment, and I have two things to say.
    1. The odds. Personally, I've been lucky with the ONE Vanguards, got all the Rares in 8 or 9 pulls, but zero Mythics pulled this way. I certainly beat the odds. What are the odds? The chance of a Rare is 90% and there are 5 of them in the pack, so you have an 18% chance on any single pull of getting a specific card - say, that Koth you're after! Another way to express this is that on any one pull you have an 82% chance of NOT getting it, or (1 - p). Two pulls? This becomes (1 - p) squared - sorry don't know how to do superscript on this - and with n pulls, it becomes (1 - p) to the nth. So if you spend 1200 pinks chasing Koth and have 10 goes, you have a 13.7% chance of NOT getting it, or about 1 in 7. Sucks if you're the 1, and with a large user base that's a lot of people feeling unlucky. This becomes about 1 in 20 after 15 attempts, or one person in every coalition - you know who you are!!
    2. The whole non-dupe thing. Come on @Oktagon_Support it's time to stop this as it only causes resentment, which I'm 100% sure is not your intention. Gems can only be purchased in small amounts and a high cost in bundles with Crystals, Runes and sometimes cards, so I suspect very few people do this and there's no advantage to the developers in maintaining this system. Personally, I would remove Mythics from the Rare pack, and make them 240 Gems a go, all non-dupe, which would be fairer and bring them in line broadly with the Crystals cost of Fblthp alt art cards. Players will still have to grind to get those hard to find pinkies, but feel that it was time well spent for an acceptable reward.

    Great math, but imho you make an important assumption: you weigh each rare evenly. We don't know that. Maybe the distribution among the rare VGs is different. This has been a hot topic in the past that some of the Zendikar mythics were harder to pull than others.

  • TheHunter
    TheHunter Posts: 270 Mover and Shaker

    @Machine said:

    Great math, but imho you make an important assumption: you weigh each rare evenly. We don't know that. Maybe the distribution among the rare VGs is different. This has been a hot topic in the past that some of the Zendikar mythics were harder to pull than others.

    It's a nice idea but I don't buy it. Look at the probabilities - some players will have a really hard (and expensive) time trying to get certain Rare VGs, and that will seem like there is some invisible force (aka differential distribution) working against them. I couldn't 100% discount the idea but why would the devs do it? It would require effort and they don't have the time or resource to fix all the existing bugs without making more misery for players. The stuff of conspiracy theories!

  • QuiksilverHg
    QuiksilverHg Posts: 122 Tile Toppler

    @TheHunter said:

    @QuiksilverHg said:
    Why increase the cost? Mythics are generally more than twice as valuable as rares, so why make the rare more than half the cost of a mythic. Don’t put stupid ideas like that in Oktagon’s head, because they definitely run with them

    You have to give a little to take some back - I bet most players would prefer to pay a bit more to get non-dupe Rare packs. Ask @Machine and their 1st team mate - 4 Koths in a row or pay more for guaranteed new cards?

    Paying pinks for duplicates should not have been a feature at all. Saying rare packs can no longer upgrade into mythics is the give. Pinks are hard enough to get, most rares wouldn’t be worth over 200 pinks.

  • Smokincookz
    Smokincookz Posts: 247 Tile Toppler

    @TheHunter said:

    @Machine said:

    Great math, but imho you make an important assumption: you weigh each rare evenly. We don't know that. Maybe the distribution among the rare VGs is different. This has been a hot topic in the past that some of the Zendikar mythics were harder to pull than others.

    It's a nice idea but I don't buy it. Look at the probabilities - some players will have a really hard (and expensive) time trying to get certain Rare VGs, and that will seem like there is some invisible force (aka differential distribution) working against them. I couldn't 100% discount the idea but why would the devs do it? It would require effort and they don't have the time or resource to fix all the existing bugs without making more misery for players. The stuff of conspiracy theories!

    I'd heard long ago that Hibernum DID have individually weighted chance values for certain cards, as opposed to the idea that all cards of a given rarity will have the same chances.

    So unless Oktagon removed this system (unlikely), it's not really the stuff of conspiracies. The devs have no incentive to change it- it likely results in players spending more resources, adding to the temptation (for some) to spend IRL money...

  • Fireguy
    Fireguy Posts: 53 Match Maker
    edited May 2023

    I like TheHunters suggestion. Remove the chance to get Mythic VGs and also increase the rare pulls to 240. I rather spend twice as much knowing I'm going to get them all instead of hopelessly praying to (and likely losing to) RNG.

    I haven't taken any shots at the new ONE vanguards because I'm hoping @Oktagon_Support will change this system as mentioned above. It took me 14 shots to FINALLY get the Tefdaddy pull from the recent werewolf Innastrad set. Not doing that again, no way. Bad experience.

  • KrizzB
    KrizzB Posts: 90 Match Maker
    edited May 2023

    Having spent way too many pinks chasing vTyvar this is my current tally:

    12 Kayas
    9 Kaitos
    3 Koth
    3 Wanderer
    2 Jace

    That's 3480 pinks spent for a total of 880 pinks worth of vanguards (480 in rares and 400 for the mythic)

    And then i read about others in my coalition pulling 9 vTyvars in a row chasing any of the other vanguards..

    This is completely screwed up @Oktagon_Support , you seriously need to fix this ****!

  • WulFgaR77
    WulFgaR77 Posts: 47 Just Dropped In

    120 pulls - Koth, Wanderer, Lukka, Koth, Koth, Koth, Koth, Tyvar finally!

  • Machine
    Machine Posts: 779 Critical Contributor

    @KrizzB said:
    Having spent way too many pinks chasing vTyvar this is my current tally:

    12 Kayas
    9 Kaitos
    3 Koth
    3 Wanderer
    2 Jace

    That's 3480 pinks spent for a total of 880 pinks worth of vanguards (480 in rares and 400 for the mythic)

    And then i read about others in my coalition pulling 9 vTyvars in a row chasing any of the other vanguards..

    This is completely screwed up @Oktagon_Support , you seriously need to fix this ****!

    Ow man... this is terrible indeed! I admire your persistance, but your pink stash doesn't love you for it.

  • Ampersand
    Ampersand Posts: 206 Tile Toppler

    Kaya, Kaito, Kaya, Kaito, Vraska, Kaito. -_-