Akoni said: You weren't kidding about the processing power. I used my laptop for it and it got so hot while processing that I had to put it in front of a fan to cool it off.
KGB said: You must have a very old laptop or your using Internet Explorer or your laptop runs hot.I just did 1000 draws on my 6 year old gaming desktop in Firefox and it was done faster than I could scroll down. I did several other runs at 500, 400, 350, 300 and they all finished very fast (2-3 seconds to fill out the table) and the fan on my CPU never even spun up.KGBP.S. When I was totaling up my LTs + CP's I expected the CP column to divide my amount by 25 so that when I entered 3000 cp I would see 120 pulls. But instead it just took the number I entered and assumed that was the total I was drawing (so it said I had 3450 draws instead of 570 for 450 LTs + 3000 CP).P.P.S. If you wanted to see how many classic pulls it would take to get your 5/0/5 Okoye champed, set to classic, 3 covers, 1 target character, 2 unwanted colors. And then hold on to something... (seriously, never EVER try to champ a 5* using classics) - This only took 3120 pulls. It's a big number not not as big as your comment would lead you to believe. In actuality, if you set your BH to Okoye it would take at most 399 draws before you covered her via shards. It would be nice if your spreadsheet took into account shards in some way. Even if just saying how many sharded covers you'd expect to get for the draws made. So when you do 300 draws in latest it should say you get 2.25 sharded covers.
KGB said: You must have a very old laptop or your using Internet Explorer or your laptop runs hot.
Srheer0 said: How often does the Latest Legends roster get changed? Is it every 8-12 weeks?
Theghouse said: For the CP and LTs calculator, the sheet ignores LTs by design when you switch to Classic because LTs can't pull classics. Also of note is that it doesn't take your total and plug it in the top left for you automatically, the CP calculator bit is just there to add it up for you right underneath. If you want to run the odds on your total, you have to change the number of pulls manually in the top left. I took the exact example numbers you gave me and it showed 570 pulls... If you take another look at this let me know if something still seems off.As for the Okoye scenario, I thought it was absolutely bonkers that it takes 900 more pulls to get 3 Okoyes of one color out of classics (3120) than it does to get 339 covers to 550 an entire set of Latests/Specials (2260). I'm surprised that's not more shocking to you!
akboyce said: Looks cool. If you are looking for feedback you might want to change how the rounded odds are calculated or let it say things like 6 in 10. Reason I say that is for my current situation it says I have 68.65% chance to get 44 covers which it says is approximately 1 in 1. The next row is 62.73% which it says is approximately 1 in 2. I can swallow 62% being approximately 1 in 2 but its a bit of a stretch to say 69% is approximately 1 in 1.
Srheer0 said: Thank you for your efforts doing this. If anyone were just pulling Latest Legends and not hoarding, I found out from experience you get about 10-16 covers of each 5star between the time they enter Latest and the time they leave latest. Have now switched to the hoarding style. Looking forward to when Sw5ch and whoever the next 5star enters LL tokens. How often does the Latest Legends roster get changed? Is it every 8-12 weeks?
Theghouse said: akboyce said: Looks cool. If you are looking for feedback you might want to change how the rounded odds are calculated or let it say things like 6 in 10. Reason I say that is for my current situation it says I have 68.65% chance to get 44 covers which it says is approximately 1 in 1. The next row is 62.73% which it says is approximately 1 in 2. I can swallow 62% being approximately 1 in 2 but its a bit of a stretch to say 69% is approximately 1 in 1. Thanks.I played around with more "precise" odds, and what I found is that it got very messy looking when the leading number wasn't consistent. For example, it isn't immediately recognizable at first glance which of these is the highest and which is the lowest unless you do some quick mental math:1 in 32 in 73 in 54 in 10Those not familiar with probability or great at math would guess either the top or bottom, but 2 in 7 (28.6%) is the lowest and 3 in 5 (60%) is the highest.I'll play around with making anything over 10 percent "x in 10" as opposed to "1 in x" and see how that flows visually.
XandorXerxes said: Theghouse said: akboyce said: Looks cool. If you are looking for feedback you might want to change how the rounded odds are calculated or let it say things like 6 in 10. Reason I say that is for my current situation it says I have 68.65% chance to get 44 covers which it says is approximately 1 in 1. The next row is 62.73% which it says is approximately 1 in 2. I can swallow 62% being approximately 1 in 2 but its a bit of a stretch to say 69% is approximately 1 in 1. Thanks.I played around with more "precise" odds, and what I found is that it got very messy looking when the leading number wasn't consistent. For example, it isn't immediately recognizable at first glance which of these is the highest and which is the lowest unless you do some quick mental math:1 in 32 in 73 in 54 in 10Those not familiar with probability or great at math would guess either the top or bottom, but 2 in 7 (28.6%) is the lowest and 3 in 5 (60%) is the highest.I'll play around with making anything over 10 percent "x in 10" as opposed to "1 in x" and see how that flows visually. You can convert them all to "1 in x" but that might take some spreadsheet-fu.Using the above example:1 in 31 in 3.51 in 1.671 in 2.5I'd probably only do it for the first 15-20 lines or so too, any more would be superfluous since they vary well enough on their own.
Sekilicious said: I think I figured my question out using the doc. I need to average ~1/day to make sure the latest are champed when pulling as you go. I think. Or I got confused. Either way.