Because in actual practice there will be times where a person obtains every bonus shard and times where they will not. For example, I farm one node 5 times and get all 5 bonus shards, but the next node I only get 4 out of 5. I received 9/10, 8/10 the next day, and 10/10 the next. GhostTruckin makes an excellent point in that assuming 4 out of 5 is still generous. You could easily have a spree of 4/5, 4/5, 5/5, 2/5, 0/5.
The 8,250 is probably the safe number for anyone trying to calculate the energy to crystals needed to get the shuttle within the initial run. The problem with this number is the same as the 6,600 number.........it does not take into account actual rng results hence why I averaged them the two for 7,425. The 6,600 number requires a player to land every single bonus drop which is virtually impossible while the 8,250 number requires that player never get that fifth bonus drop. In reality, a player is likely to land that fifth drop often potentially reducing the energy cost significantly. That is not taking into account outliers like the inevitable 0/5 or 1/5 attempts that will happen.
I’m sorry, this is incorrect...
8,250 does include the ‘actual rng results’ as an average, because it is based on the stated percentages.
The math here is really simple. Per the dev post, 1 energy spent = 4% chance at a shard.
So to backcheck the number stated.
8,250 x 4% = 330
Or to figure it from a baseline number of shards needed (330) and the stated chance per shard for 1 energy (0.04)
330/0.04 = 8250
This will be the average spent across all players.
Edited for clarity and added the reverse equation.
FailingCrab - I did the actual math in another thread and just used the number for here, but here is how I received the numbers I did.
6,600 Energy is the minimum required to 7 star the new Shuttle. This assumes a player lands every single bonus drop on a 20 energy node. (330 shards x 20 energy).
Well, the theoretical minimum would be achieved with 330 successful sims of an 8 energy node for 2640 total energy. But since both scenarios ignore the odds that were explicitly given to us, the numbers they produce are not going to be particularly useful. 8250 is the amount of energy the average player can expect to spend.
Well, the theoretical minimum would be achieved with 330 successful sims of an 8 energy node for 2640 total energy. But since both scenarios ignore the odds that were explicitly given to us, the numbers they produce are not going to be particularly useful. 8250 is the amount of energy the average player can expect to spend.
I do not think anyone in this game has that much RNG blessing, but you raise a valid point.
I concede the point regarding the energy and I appreciate the civil tone our disagreement had. Mike's post kind of clicked and I can see where the 8,250 number would be the most realistic for players. I believe my big hang-up is that I perceived the 8,250 as being advocated a hard absolute when it was not.
So I admit that I was wrong and appreciate your efforts to demonstrate where I erred.
I concede the point regarding the energy and I appreciate the civil tone our disagreement had. Mike's post kind of clicked and I can see where the 8,250 number would be the most realistic for players. I believe my big hang-up is that I perceived the 8,250 as being advocated a hard absolute when it was not.
So I admit that I was wrong and appreciate your efforts to demonstrate where I erred.
A civil disagreement that ended with one party gracefully conceding, ON THE INTERNET? Hats off to you sir.
I concede the point regarding the energy and I appreciate the civil tone our disagreement had. Mike's post kind of clicked and I can see where the 8,250 number would be the most realistic for players. I believe my big hang-up is that I perceived the 8,250 as being advocated a hard absolute when it was not.
So I admit that I was wrong and appreciate your efforts to demonstrate where I erred.
No passive agressive comments? No name calling? The internet has changed.
I try to be a person that is honorable and respectful and that includes owning up to my mistakes. Like I said, I was beginning to see throughout that I had erred and Mike's post pushed me toward realizing where I erred in the process. I saw no need to insult anyone for my misunderstanding, especially when I had not been insulted in the process.
First of all, I hated statistics. I acknowledge its usefulness, but it is not something I enjoy. The average of our two numbers is 7,425. So an average player is going to spend about 7,500 with as you said a high degree of variance. Someone could create a poll to see how much it took to find out of the average is true or not.
Additionally, this does not factor in the potential standard release pack of 25 shards. Yay, math.
Lol I love this. chionophile calculated the average energy it would take to 7*. You then pulled a number out of nowhere based on a 100% drop rate and now you're trying to compromise using the average of your two numbers? That's not how maths works.
But that´s how politics works. I see a great future for the FailingCrab!
Because in actual practice there will be times where a person obtains every bonus shard and times where they will not. For example, I farm one node 5 times and get all 5 bonus shards, but the next node I only get 4 out of 5. I received 9/10, 8/10 the next day, and 10/10 the next. GhostTruckin makes an excellent point in that assuming 4 out of 5 is still generous. You could easily have a spree of 4/5, 4/5, 5/5, 2/5, 0/5.
The 8,250 is probably the safe number for anyone trying to calculate the energy to crystals needed to get the shuttle within the initial run. The problem with this number is the same as the 6,600 number.........it does not take into account actual rng results hence why I averaged them the two for 7,425. The 6,600 number requires a player to land every single bonus drop which is virtually impossible while the 8,250 number requires that player never get that fifth bonus drop. In reality, a player is likely to land that fifth drop often potentially reducing the energy cost significantly. That is not taking into account outliers like the inevitable 0/5 or 1/5 attempts that will happen.
I’m sorry, this is incorrect...
8,250 does include the ‘actual rng results’ as an average, because it is based on the stated percentages.
The math here is really simple. Per the dev post, 1 energy spent = 4% chance at a shard.
So to backcheck the number stated.
8,250 x 4% = 330
Or to figure it from a baseline number of shards needed (330) and the stated chance per shard for 1 energy (0.04)
330/0.04 = 8250
This will be the average spent across all players.
Edited for clarity and added the reverse equation.
Just to be precise: this is the expected (mean) value of the distribution of dropped shards over energy used. Most people will spend more or less (in the range of the first standard deviation). But you all can count on me: I always had to spend more than was to be expected and that means someone else will spend less.
An account on the subreddit ran some numbers and came up with each node eventually having nearly the same (if not the same) drop rate. I believe the balance is in having a total energy of, let’s say, 100. You do the 20 energy nodes 5 times, or the 16 however many and it ends up being identical. It’s a good guide and something I’ll be using as needed. I’m just going for what I’m already working on and the shuttle can come with it as much as possible.
First of all, I hated statistics. I acknowledge its usefulness, but it is not something I enjoy. The average of our two numbers is 7,425. So an average player is going to spend about 7,500 with as you said a high degree of variance. Someone could create a poll to see how much it took to find out of the average is true or not.
Additionally, this does not factor in the potential standard release pack of 25 shards. Yay, math.
That's not how this works, you can't just throw out a number based on bad math and somehow say that's statistically as likely to happen as the average. Edit, well I guess it's already been resolved.
Because its fun here is 5 star unlock and so on...
145 shards at .04 = 3625 energy for 5 star
80 shards at .04 = 2000 energy for a 4 star unlock
50 shards at .04 = 1250 energy for a 3 star unlock
25 shards at .04 = 625 energy for a 2 star unlock
10 shards at .04 = 250 energy for a 1 star unlock
And ive never seen a 6 star unlock but here is the math.
230 shards at .04 = 5750 energy for a 6 star unlock
First of all, I hated statistics. I acknowledge its usefulness, but it is not something I enjoy. The average of our two numbers is 7,425. So an average player is going to spend about 7,500 with as you said a high degree of variance. Someone could create a poll to see how much it took to find out of the average is true or not.
Additionally, this does not factor in the potential standard release pack of 25 shards. Yay, math.
I wouldn't let you in charge of hyperdrive calculations 😉
Statistically speaking, every single person in the world has approximately one *EDIT: male reproductive organ".
With that being said, it's a "chase", so after fleet, it'll move to another area. I'm going to assume it's not best to try to max out the attempts since you'll get it eventually, and I doubt they'd have it be a meta defining ship since it's free out the gates. With the Grand Arena GP situation, I'm not sure I even want to unlock a new ship unless it's top tier.
The thing with this event it is ANY hard node meaning that you do not have to spend energy on node refreshes. That fact alone will save people crystals.
Because its fun here is 5 star unlock and so on...
145 shards at .04 = 3625 energy for 5 star
80 shards at .04 = 2000 energy for a 4 star unlock
50 shards at .04 = 1250 energy for a 3 star unlock
25 shards at .04 = 625 energy for a 2 star unlock
10 shards at .04 = 250 energy for a 1 star unlock
And ive never seen a 6 star unlock but here is the math.
230 shards at .04 = 5750 energy for a 6 star unlock
Most marquee characters unlock at 2 stars so 625 is not really a high cost. Even if it was a 3 star unlock, 1,250 is still a reasonable amount in 4/5 days (still some debate in the other thread) of farming. One of the biggest questions currently unanswered is whether or not the shuttle is even worth trying to max out during its stay on Fleet nodes?
You literally have an entire thread here dedicated to how stupid you are at math.
That is certainly a negative way to look at the issue. One could consider it an example of how disagreement could be ended in a civil manner when one party realizes that they were mistaken and realizes the validity of the opposing argument. Every person is capable of making a mistake on a simple issue and is not indicative of their overall ability to accomplish anything. I made a miscalculation and the others corrected my error, demonstrated how it was wrong, and were quite civil in the process. That mistake does not indicate how good or bad my math skills overall so your insult is unwarranted.
I want to add a supposition: Yes, based on just refreshes, it's impossible to 7* in the four days (I think it goes over the max refreshes).
However, if energy packs are available even just for one purchase for each of the days, I believe the number of refreshes needed per day goes to four (I can't remember if I based it off 4 or 5 days). It therefore becomes possible to max it in the initial timeframe (I think last night I calculated a cost of 10,000 crystals, though that may have been based on 5 days). In any case, IF the energy packs are available each day, you can bet there will be many whales and dolphins who will max it in the four days for less than the cost of a vault.
You literally have an entire thread here dedicated to how stupid you are at math.
That is certainly a negative way to look at the issue. One could consider it an example of how disagreement could be ended in a civil manner when one party realizes that they were mistaken and realizes the validity of the opposing argument. Every person is capable of making a mistake on a simple issue and is not indicative of their overall ability to accomplish anything. I made a miscalculation and the others corrected my error, demonstrated how it was wrong, and were quite civil in the process. That mistake does not indicate how good or bad my math skills overall so your insult is unwarranted.
The reason I had replied was because it wasn't just a simple mistake on your part, it was you correcting someone else and then saying to "meet in the middle" because you didn't understand your own mistake. Any negative response was honestly warranted because you tripled down in a pretty dumb way. Granted you did stop arguing.
You literally have an entire thread here dedicated to how stupid you are at math.
That is certainly a negative way to look at the issue. One could consider it an example of how disagreement could be ended in a civil manner when one party realizes that they were mistaken and realizes the validity of the opposing argument. Every person is capable of making a mistake on a simple issue and is not indicative of their overall ability to accomplish anything. I made a miscalculation and the others corrected my error, demonstrated how it was wrong, and were quite civil in the process. That mistake does not indicate how good or bad my math skills overall so your insult is unwarranted.
The reason I had replied was because it wasn't just a simple mistake on your part, it was you correcting someone else and then saying to "meet in the middle" because you didn't understand your own mistake. Any negative response was honestly warranted because you tripled down in a pretty dumb way. Granted you did stop arguing.
This guy right here is right, I wasn’t going to read every response to see if you conceded your argument nor did I directly point you out, as you did that to yourself. I just hope nobody makes a plan based upon your numbers, and I’m glad you understand you were in the wrong and won’t spread any further misinformation. In fact the best thing you could do is edit all of your previous posts in this thread to make sure people aren’t ill informed.
You literally have an entire thread here dedicated to how stupid you are at math.
That is certainly a negative way to look at the issue. One could consider it an example of how disagreement could be ended in a civil manner when one party realizes that they were mistaken and realizes the validity of the opposing argument. Every person is capable of making a mistake on a simple issue and is not indicative of their overall ability to accomplish anything. I made a miscalculation and the others corrected my error, demonstrated how it was wrong, and were quite civil in the process. That mistake does not indicate how good or bad my math skills overall so your insult is unwarranted.
The reason I had replied was because it wasn't just a simple mistake on your part, it was you correcting someone else and then saying to "meet in the middle" because you didn't understand your own mistake. Any negative response was honestly warranted because you tripled down in a pretty dumb way. Granted you did stop arguing.
This guy right here is right, I wasn’t going to read every response to see if you conceded your argument nor did I directly point you out, as you did that to yourself. I just hope nobody makes a plan based upon your numbers, and I’m glad you understand you were in the wrong and won’t spread any further misinformation. In fact the best thing you could do is edit all of your previous posts in this thread to make sure people aren’t ill informed.
That seems pretty unnecessary. How many mistakes have all of us posted on the internet? It's important to see and learn from mistakes, because maybe someone else will have the same thought process as HK22, but after reading through the discussion will come to an understanding that they wouldn't have otherwise.
5 energy / hour ...... 24 hour / day 5*24 = 120 Energy + 45 refresh =165 energy/day
160/20 energy battle= 8 attemts/day 8•80% (.8) = 6.4
Event runs 5 days: 6.4 x 5 = 32 shards (no refreshes included no crystals necessary)
32 Shards is close to amount a marquee event has.
Now let’s pretend someone buys three refreshes every day for 5 day... or is smart and saves 3 refreshes until right before the event goes live giving them effectively 6 days instead of 5.
120 energy x 6 days x 3 refreshes = 2160 energy.
100 x 3 x 6 = 1,800 Crystals
Take 2160 energy and divide it by 20 energy (1 attempt) 2160 / 20 = 108 multiply it by 80%.
108 x 80% = 86. 86 + 32 = 118 shards.
So doing the math using 3 refreshes a day combined with your regular energy you can expect to earn 118 shards during the event... assuming the event is once a month it’d take 3 months to get the ship 7* if you spend all those crystals on it. Which would be 1,800 x 3 = 5,400 crystals.
This is assuming you can farm 3+ Hard nodes and pay no node refresh cost.
Replies
I’m sorry, this is incorrect...
8,250 does include the ‘actual rng results’ as an average, because it is based on the stated percentages.
The math here is really simple. Per the dev post, 1 energy spent = 4% chance at a shard.
So to backcheck the number stated.
8,250 x 4% = 330
Or to figure it from a baseline number of shards needed (330) and the stated chance per shard for 1 energy (0.04)
330/0.04 = 8250
This will be the average spent across all players.
Edited for clarity and added the reverse equation.
I do not think anyone in this game has that much RNG blessing, but you raise a valid point.
So I admit that I was wrong and appreciate your efforts to demonstrate where I erred.
1 soon (ish)
2 who knows, even after the kit is revealed
3 yes.
A civil disagreement that ended with one party gracefully conceding, ON THE INTERNET? Hats off to you sir.
No passive agressive comments? No name calling? The internet has changed.
But that´s how politics works. I see a great future for the FailingCrab!
Just to be precise: this is the expected (mean) value of the distribution of dropped shards over energy used. Most people will spend more or less (in the range of the first standard deviation). But you all can count on me: I always had to spend more than was to be expected and that means someone else will spend less.
That's not how this works, you can't just throw out a number based on bad math and somehow say that's statistically as likely to happen as the average. Edit, well I guess it's already been resolved.
Lol
Soon (ish)..... tm
Do we know if this is a 330 unlock or is it a 5 star unlock.... or less?
145 shards at .04 = 3625 energy for 5 star
80 shards at .04 = 2000 energy for a 4 star unlock
50 shards at .04 = 1250 energy for a 3 star unlock
25 shards at .04 = 625 energy for a 2 star unlock
10 shards at .04 = 250 energy for a 1 star unlock
And ive never seen a 6 star unlock but here is the math.
230 shards at .04 = 5750 energy for a 6 star unlock
Fair enough, thats why we have droids!
With that being said, it's a "chase", so after fleet, it'll move to another area. I'm going to assume it's not best to try to max out the attempts since you'll get it eventually, and I doubt they'd have it be a meta defining ship since it's free out the gates. With the Grand Arena GP situation, I'm not sure I even want to unlock a new ship unless it's top tier.
It's any Fleet node, period. Not just hard nodes.
Most marquee characters unlock at 2 stars so 625 is not really a high cost. Even if it was a 3 star unlock, 1,250 is still a reasonable amount in 4/5 days (still some debate in the other thread) of farming. One of the biggest questions currently unanswered is whether or not the shuttle is even worth trying to max out during its stay on Fleet nodes?
That is certainly a negative way to look at the issue. One could consider it an example of how disagreement could be ended in a civil manner when one party realizes that they were mistaken and realizes the validity of the opposing argument. Every person is capable of making a mistake on a simple issue and is not indicative of their overall ability to accomplish anything. I made a miscalculation and the others corrected my error, demonstrated how it was wrong, and were quite civil in the process. That mistake does not indicate how good or bad my math skills overall so your insult is unwarranted.
However, if energy packs are available even just for one purchase for each of the days, I believe the number of refreshes needed per day goes to four (I can't remember if I based it off 4 or 5 days). It therefore becomes possible to max it in the initial timeframe (I think last night I calculated a cost of 10,000 crystals, though that may have been based on 5 days). In any case, IF the energy packs are available each day, you can bet there will be many whales and dolphins who will max it in the four days for less than the cost of a vault.
The reason I had replied was because it wasn't just a simple mistake on your part, it was you correcting someone else and then saying to "meet in the middle" because you didn't understand your own mistake. Any negative response was honestly warranted because you tripled down in a pretty dumb way. Granted you did stop arguing.
This guy right here is right, I wasn’t going to read every response to see if you conceded your argument nor did I directly point you out, as you did that to yourself. I just hope nobody makes a plan based upon your numbers, and I’m glad you understand you were in the wrong and won’t spread any further misinformation. In fact the best thing you could do is edit all of your previous posts in this thread to make sure people aren’t ill informed.
That seems pretty unnecessary. How many mistakes have all of us posted on the internet? It's important to see and learn from mistakes, because maybe someone else will have the same thought process as HK22, but after reading through the discussion will come to an understanding that they wouldn't have otherwise.
160/20 energy battle= 8 attemts/day 8•80% (.8) = 6.4
Event runs 5 days: 6.4 x 5 = 32 shards (no refreshes included no crystals necessary)
32 Shards is close to amount a marquee event has.
Now let’s pretend someone buys three refreshes every day for 5 day... or is smart and saves 3 refreshes until right before the event goes live giving them effectively 6 days instead of 5.
120 energy x 6 days x 3 refreshes = 2160 energy.
100 x 3 x 6 = 1,800 Crystals
Take 2160 energy and divide it by 20 energy (1 attempt) 2160 / 20 = 108 multiply it by 80%.
108 x 80% = 86. 86 + 32 = 118 shards.
So doing the math using 3 refreshes a day combined with your regular energy you can expect to earn 118 shards during the event... assuming the event is once a month it’d take 3 months to get the ship 7* if you spend all those crystals on it. Which would be 1,800 x 3 = 5,400 crystals.
This is assuming you can farm 3+ Hard nodes and pay no node refresh cost.