I'm better off than a lot of folks, but still within a reasonable distance of a 2% per energy drop rate:
780 energy spent on 10 energy node
78 attempts
18 blueprints
18/78 = 23.077%
23.077% per attempt / 10 energy = 2.3077% per energy spent.
Also, even with this change, spending on a 100 crystal refresh or even 200 crystal refresh is farm-efficient compared to buying in shipments -
You would expect 120 energy = 12 attempts for gear on a 10 energy node * 20% drop rate for those nodes = 2.4 blueprints per refresh.
At 100 crystals per refresh, that's 41 &2/3rds crystals per blueprint.
At 200 crystals per refresh, that's 83 & 1/3rd crystals per blueprint.
With shipments costing 100 crystals per blueprint, on average even 200 crystal refreshes will pay off compared to buying them. On top of that, you get the benefits of farming g12 gear. (Obviously if you're going after shards on hard nodes, node-refresh costs come into play, but you can always skip that refresh and move on to gear farming once you've exhausted your hard node attempts).
Thus, if you have the crystals even 200 crystal refreshes are worth it for people who spend on new ships.Of course, most people do not do this.
If you don't spend on new ships, but do spend crystals on energy and/or node refreshes when farming ships to get them quicker, the ultimate break-even point will depend on how much you typically spend on refreshing nodes and energy, but at least the 50 energy refreshes are worth it because of the extra gear you get.
The real conundrum for me is whether I want to skip the 100 crystal refreshes this time so I can focus on buying Kyros for GLs. It's not that a 100-refresh isn't "worth it" in crystals. It's whether it's "worth it" in terms of how much it would delay GL progress.
Blueprints gained = 36 attempts extra per day * 5 days * 20% drop rate = 36 blueprints.
Of course, my g12 needed is the Mk12 Fusion Furnace and I'll get about the same drop rate (20%) for those as for Y-wing blueprints, so I hurry along my efforts to relic RHPoe, RHFInn, & RTrooper by 36 FF prototype salvage as well.
Costs = 100 x 3/day x 5 days = 1500 crystals.
So fully funding all 3 100-crystal refreshes over the whole length of the chase is about 3 days of my crystal profit per day, after normal daily expenses. It's hard to justify delaying GLs even a single day for a ship that belongs to a faction I don't run, but it is crystal-efficient, so it's up to each person how they feel about this.
8 shards on 600 energy here, so 1.3%. It's day one, so we'll see how it changes. I have days with horrible drop rates and days with good ones, if you keep track it does balance out. It is kind of annoying that we have a limited time on this because one bad day is much more impactful. I'm not mad tho, I need the gear I'm farming, so it's just a bonus
I’m farming hard nodes and have a much better drop rate. Did 8-16 energy nodes and 16-20 energy nodes. Ended up with 10 shards after spending 448 energy.
it seems from a few of the numbers posted above that the overall rate is approaching 2% which seems right, since the old was 4% and they changed the rates for energy.......how much cost that will equal to doesnt' seem to line up with previous models, which is also shown in a few posters data.....
it seems from a few of the numbers posted above that the overall rate is approaching 2% which seems right, since the old was 4% and they changed the rates for energy.......how much cost that will equal to doesnt' seem to line up with previous models, which is also shown in a few posters data.....
But that wouldn’t make sense because the old GC’s that were on the normal/hard nodes had similar energy refill and costs. So if the drop rate was cut in half, I’m curious to know the reasoning.
it seems from a few of the numbers posted above that the overall rate is approaching 2% which seems right, since the old was 4% and they changed the rates for energy.......how much cost that will equal to doesnt' seem to line up with previous models, which is also shown in a few posters data.....
But that wouldn’t make sense because the old GC’s that were on the normal/hard nodes had similar energy refill and costs. So if the drop rate was cut in half, I’m curious to know the reasoning.
There's never been a chase on a normal energy node. They've all been fleet or cantina.
I spent about 900 ship energy on day one, and got 40 shard.
Not bragging, just saying that just because some don't get any doesn't mean no one gets any, and the ones that get close to none are more likely to complain on the boards.
it seems from a few of the numbers posted above that the overall rate is approaching 2% which seems right, since the old was 4% and they changed the rates for energy.......how much cost that will equal to doesnt' seem to line up with previous models, which is also shown in a few posters data.....
But that wouldn’t make sense because the old GC’s that were on the normal/hard nodes had similar energy refill and costs. So if the drop rate was cut in half, I’m curious to know the reasoning.
it seems from a few of the numbers posted above that the overall rate is approaching 2% which seems right, since the old was 4% and they changed the rates for energy.......how much cost that will equal to doesnt' seem to line up with previous models, which is also shown in a few posters data.....
But that wouldn’t make sense because the old GC’s that were on the normal/hard nodes had similar energy refill and costs. So if the drop rate was cut in half, I’m curious to know the reasoning.
There's never been a chase on a normal energy node. They've all been fleet or cantina.
this. they have always been on the "more expensive" refreshed energies, that had the longer refresh time.
it seems from a few of the numbers posted above that the overall rate is approaching 2% which seems right, since the old was 4% and they changed the rates for energy.......how much cost that will equal to doesnt' seem to line up with previous models, which is also shown in a few posters data.....
But that wouldn’t make sense because the old GC’s that were on the normal/hard nodes had similar energy refill and costs. So if the drop rate was cut in half, I’m curious to know the reasoning.
There was never a chase on ls/ds energy, only cantina and fleet. Furthermore, this is the first fleet node chase since the change to fleet energy, so the energy refill and costs are different than the other 3 chases.
it seems from a few of the numbers posted above that the overall rate is approaching 2% which seems right, since the old was 4% and they changed the rates for energy.......how much cost that will equal to doesnt' seem to line up with previous models, which is also shown in a few posters data.....
"seems right" is your reasoning or backed by some info from the devs?
it seems from a few of the numbers posted above that the overall rate is approaching 2% which seems right, since the old was 4% and they changed the rates for energy.......how much cost that will equal to doesnt' seem to line up with previous models, which is also shown in a few posters data.....
"seems right" is your reasoning or backed by some info from the devs?
No due to logic.
It was 4% with a more "expensive" energy system, when you translate this to a "cheaper" energy system a rate of 2% seems right. To keep the relationship to previous events in line.
it seems from a few of the numbers posted above that the overall rate is approaching 2% which seems right, since the old was 4% and they changed the rates for energy.......how much cost that will equal to doesnt' seem to line up with previous models, which is also shown in a few posters data.....
"seems right" is your reasoning or backed by some info from the devs?
No due to logic.
It was 4% with a more "expensive" energy system, when you translate this to a "cheaper" energy system a rate of 2% seems right. To keep the relationship to previous events in line.
Yeah, I get this. I just wanted to know if it was confirmed.
it seems from a few of the numbers posted above that the overall rate is approaching 2% which seems right, since the old was 4% and they changed the rates for energy.......how much cost that will equal to doesnt' seem to line up with previous models, which is also shown in a few posters data.....
But that wouldn’t make sense because the old GC’s that were on the normal/hard nodes had similar energy refill and costs. So if the drop rate was cut in half, I’m curious to know the reasoning.
There was never a chase on ls/ds energy, only cantina and fleet. Furthermore, this is the first fleet node chase since the change to fleet energy, so the energy refill and costs are different than the other 3 chases.
Well I guess it “makes sense” then but would’ve been nice to know that the rates had changed prior to people spending crystals expecting the same drop rate.
And for those saying “use logic, git gud” about different rates for lesser expensive nodes/ refresh rates, god forbid CG does something that benefits the players by keeping drop rates the same
As I've detailed in a separate comment above, if you spent crystals on 200-crystal refreshes, you would still have had an expectation of a better reward than spending the same amount on blueprints in Shipments (where ships cost 100 crystals per blueprint).
12 attempts at 10 energy/attempt = 2.4 shards.
6 attempts at 20 energy/attempt = 2.4 shards.
For 200 crystal refreshes, that's 1.2 blueprints per 100 crystals spent. And that rate is 20% better than the 100 crystals per blueprint you'd get from shipments, PLUS you also get the normal benefits of farming whatever node. Sure, RNG is going to mean that for some people the gamble doesn't pay off, but for far more than half of folks, it will.
You should only be concerned that this wasn't fair to you if you were purchasing energy refreshes for more than 200 crystals a pop.
That said, I'm not trying to defend CG's lack of updating their per-energy-drop-rate information. If they had never published the drop rate, that would be one thing. But here they have and changed it. They should have provided updated info.
I am, however, saying that the math works out for any refreshes that cost less than or equal to 200 crystals per. If that's all you spent, the lack of info didn't cause you any harm.
I spent about 900 ship energy on day one, and got 40 shard.
Not bragging, just saying that just because some don't get any doesn't mean no one gets any, and the ones that get close to none are more likely to complain on the boards.
As I've detailed in a separate comment above, if you spent crystals on 200-crystal refreshes, you would still have had an expectation of a better reward than spending the same amount on blueprints in Shipments (where ships cost 100 crystals per blueprint).
12 attempts at 10 energy/attempt = 2.4 shards.
6 attempts at 20 energy/attempt = 2.4 shards.
For 200 crystal refreshes, that's 1.2 blueprints per 100 crystals spent. And that rate is 20% better than the 100 crystals per blueprint you'd get from shipments, PLUS you also get the normal benefits of farming whatever node. Sure, RNG is going to mean that for some people the gamble doesn't pay off, but for far more than half of folks, it will.
You should only be concerned that this wasn't fair to you if you were purchasing energy refreshes for more than 200 crystals a pop.
That said, I'm not trying to defend CG's lack of updating their per-energy-drop-rate information. If they had never published the drop rate, that would be one thing. But here they have and changed it. They should have provided updated info.
I am, however, saying that the math works out for any refreshes that cost less than or equal to 200 crystals per. If that's all you spent, the lack of info didn't cause you any harm.
Or those crystals could’ve been spent elsewhere if people weren’t looking to invest twice as many crystals as before just to unlock a ship from previous GC’s.
Nobody is saying that it’s unfair in comparison to the crystal purchases in shipments. That’s not in question. It’s the lack of information that the drop rates differed from previous GL’s. Which, again, comes full circle to their lack of communication and disconnect with the community. Wouldn’t it be prudent of them to have told the player base, “hey this GC has different rates because of different currency and energy refresh rates/cost.” After laying out drop rates from previous GC’s. That’s the problem.
I spent about 900 ship energy on day one, and got 40 shard.
Not bragging, just saying that just because some don't get any doesn't mean no one gets any, and the ones that get close to none are more likely to complain on the boards.
pic?
You were right to question my numbers - they were wrong, I miscalculated.
I was trying to figure out how this is working out since the rate changes "should" equate to same # of shards, but don't seem to be.
Here is my really rough math.
Someone feel free to correct me if I've done something wrong.
Red is the Cantina or OLD Fleet Rates. Blue is the NEW Fleet Rates we are seeing today.
So obviously the base 120/day v/s 240/day is the same.
But right off the bat the free 45 at 6PM is now worth 1/2 as many Shards.
It gets worse when dealing w/ Refreshes.
The 1st 3 give you the same "rate" per crystal spent BUT, the minute you go to double rate today to make up for the lower drop % you start to loose out massively.
I've compared 3 Refreshes at 100 crystals each under the old system compared to 5 refreshes today under the new system for 350 crystals.
As you can see its MORE expensive and you get LESS shards.
All I can say is for programmers, they are not good at basic math.
But feel free to correct me if I have something wrong. I am doing this while taking a class at work so multitasking
it seems from a few of the numbers posted above that the overall rate is approaching 2% which seems right, since the old was 4% and they changed the rates for energy.......how much cost that will equal to doesnt' seem to line up with previous models, which is also shown in a few posters data.....
But that wouldn’t make sense because the old GC’s that were on the normal/hard nodes had similar energy refill and costs. So if the drop rate was cut in half, I’m curious to know the reasoning.
There was never a chase on ls/ds energy, only cantina and fleet. Furthermore, this is the first fleet node chase since the change to fleet energy, so the energy refill and costs are different than the other 3 chases.
Well I guess it “makes sense” then but would’ve been nice to know that the rates had changed prior to people spending crystals expecting the same drop rate.
And for those saying “use logic, git gud” about different rates for lesser expensive nodes/ refresh rates, god forbid CG does something that benefits the players by keeping drop rates the same
Yeah, I am surprised CG hasn't confirmed this by now today. I get it may have been easy to overlook, but all it takes is a simple update stating the new drop rate formula in a post.
it seems from a few of the numbers posted above that the overall rate is approaching 2% which seems right, since the old was 4% and they changed the rates for energy.......how much cost that will equal to doesnt' seem to line up with previous models, which is also shown in a few posters data.....
"seems right" is your reasoning or backed by some info from the devs?
No due to logic.
It was 4% with a more "expensive" energy system, when you translate this to a "cheaper" energy system a rate of 2% seems right. To keep the relationship to previous events in line.
Yeah, I get this. I just wanted to know if it was confirmed.
I was trying to figure out how this is working out since the rate changes "should" equate to same # of shards, but don't seem to be.
Here is my really rough math.
Someone feel free to correct me if I've done something wrong.
Red is the Cantina or OLD Fleet Rates. Blue is the NEW Fleet Rates we are seeing today.
So obviously the base 120/day v/s 240/day is the same.
But right off the bat the free 45 at 6PM is now worth 1/2 as many Shards.
It gets worse when dealing w/ Refreshes.
The 1st 3 give you the same "rate" per crystal spent BUT, the minute you go to double rate today to make up for the lower drop % you start to loose out massively.
I've compared 3 Refreshes at 100 crystals each under the old system compared to 5 refreshes today under the new system for 350 crystals.
As you can see its MORE expensive and you get LESS shards.
All I can say is for programmers, they are not good at basic math.
But feel free to correct me if I have something wrong. I am doing this while taking a class at work so multitasking
This is more or less in line with what I found in my post on the previous page. The amount of shards you get off the regen is the same, though the daily collection accounts for a little difference. The big change is on refreshes since you need about twice the number of refreshes to get a given number of shards. While the refreshes do start at a lower cost, they end up costing more after 100 crystals (1 cantina vs 2 current fleet) because costs increase exponentially. For example, using a 3x100 cantina, you'd need 3x50 and 3x100 for a 300 vs 450 crystal cost to be equivalent expected shards.
There is absolutely no way CG didn't change the formula for drops for this event. the previous chase events were 4% chance per energy spent. so 80% on a 20 energy hard node. that is currently false for this event. CG needs to compensate here for false advertising, making a stealth change, or just having a big oops moment and forgetting to plug in the chase formula for these shards.
In all previous chase events, i could get 5 and a half stars in the 5 days, using 6 energy refreshes (450 crystals a day) and preloading 6 refreshes before midnight on the first day. but doing that this time has earned me squat.
Edit: i think cg has plugged in the GL ticket formula instead of the chase formula.
All I can say is for programmers, they are not good at basic math.
But feel free to correct me if I have something wrong. I am doing this while taking a class at work so multitasking
i would more go the way that they know exactly what they did there
last galactic chase was a while ago
the game got more expensive since then with requirements for everything
why should they lower the costs in this kind of event?
they will just continue to get as much from the top spenders as possible
considering that you could pretty much meet the requirements for events with a single vault even if you didnt plan ahead accordingly or hoarded a lot
a vault doesnt get you anywhere these days
There is absolutely no way CG didn't change the formula for drops for this event. the previous chase events were 4% chance per energy spent. so 80% on a 20 energy hard node. that is currently false for this event. CG needs to compensate here for false advertising, making a stealth change, or just having a big oops moment and forgetting to plug in the chase formula for these shards.
In all previous chase events, i could get 5 and a half stars in the 5 days, using 6 energy refreshes (450 crystals a day) and preloading 6 refreshes before midnight on the first day. but doing that this time has earned me squat.
Edit: i think cg has plugged in the GL ticket formula instead of the chase formula.
There has been no false advertising. They haven't stated the chance per energy for this Galactic Chase. You are assuming the rate is the same as previous chases.
I believe above Kyno said he has asked and they are looking into it. Not everything needs a bug report.
There is absolutely no way CG didn't change the formula for drops for this event. the previous chase events were 4% chance per energy spent. so 80% on a 20 energy hard node. that is currently false for this event. CG needs to compensate here for false advertising, making a stealth change, or just having a big oops moment and forgetting to plug in the chase formula for these shards.
In all previous chase events, i could get 5 and a half stars in the 5 days, using 6 energy refreshes (450 crystals a day) and preloading 6 refreshes before midnight on the first day. but doing that this time has earned me squat.
Edit: i think cg has plugged in the GL ticket formula instead of the chase formula.
There has been no false advertising. They haven't stated the chance per energy for this Galactic Chase. You are assuming the rate is the same as previous chases.
I believe above Kyno said he has asked and they are looking into it. Not everything needs a bug report.
So why advertise it in the previous GCs and then leave it out when you change it?
Happy little accident?
I'd guessing poor communication (or someone pressing something they shouldn't have). As Ultra pointed out earlier in the thread, we now get more energy than we did last Chase. It wouldn't surprise me if they've adjusted the drop rate in-line with that. Data certainly seems to suggest they have.
We just need them to come out and say what it is now, or if someone has broken stuff. Kyno says they have been made aware, so know its just wait and see what they say.
There is absolutely no way CG didn't change the formula for drops for this event. the previous chase events were 4% chance per energy spent. so 80% on a 20 energy hard node. that is currently false for this event. CG needs to compensate here for false advertising, making a stealth change, or just having a big oops moment and forgetting to plug in the chase formula for these shards.
In all previous chase events, i could get 5 and a half stars in the 5 days, using 6 energy refreshes (450 crystals a day) and preloading 6 refreshes before midnight on the first day. but doing that this time has earned me squat.
Edit: i think cg has plugged in the GL ticket formula instead of the chase formula.
There has been no false advertising. They haven't stated the chance per energy for this Galactic Chase. You are assuming the rate is the same as previous chases.
I believe above Kyno said he has asked and they are looking into it. Not everything needs a bug report.
So why advertise it in the previous GCs and then leave it out when you change it?
Happy little accident?
They only announced it in one, and if you read that post it doesnt say this rate is for Galactic Chase events, but for the blueprints of "the new ship ..."
So it was not advertised for the event, but for the ship.
Replies
780 energy spent on 10 energy node
78 attempts
18 blueprints
18/78 = 23.077%
23.077% per attempt / 10 energy = 2.3077% per energy spent.
Also, even with this change, spending on a 100 crystal refresh or even 200 crystal refresh is farm-efficient compared to buying in shipments -
At 100 crystals per refresh, that's 41 &2/3rds crystals per blueprint.
At 200 crystals per refresh, that's 83 & 1/3rd crystals per blueprint.
With shipments costing 100 crystals per blueprint, on average even 200 crystal refreshes will pay off compared to buying them. On top of that, you get the benefits of farming g12 gear. (Obviously if you're going after shards on hard nodes, node-refresh costs come into play, but you can always skip that refresh and move on to gear farming once you've exhausted your hard node attempts).
Thus, if you have the crystals even 200 crystal refreshes are worth it for people who spend on new ships.Of course, most people do not do this.
If you don't spend on new ships, but do spend crystals on energy and/or node refreshes when farming ships to get them quicker, the ultimate break-even point will depend on how much you typically spend on refreshing nodes and energy, but at least the 50 energy refreshes are worth it because of the extra gear you get.
The real conundrum for me is whether I want to skip the 100 crystal refreshes this time so I can focus on buying Kyros for GLs. It's not that a 100-refresh isn't "worth it" in crystals. It's whether it's "worth it" in terms of how much it would delay GL progress.
Of course, my g12 needed is the Mk12 Fusion Furnace and I'll get about the same drop rate (20%) for those as for Y-wing blueprints, so I hurry along my efforts to relic RHPoe, RHFInn, & RTrooper by 36 FF prototype salvage as well.
Costs = 100 x 3/day x 5 days = 1500 crystals.
So fully funding all 3 100-crystal refreshes over the whole length of the chase is about 3 days of my crystal profit per day, after normal daily expenses. It's hard to justify delaying GLs even a single day for a ship that belongs to a faction I don't run, but it is crystal-efficient, so it's up to each person how they feel about this.
it seems from a few of the numbers posted above that the overall rate is approaching 2% which seems right, since the old was 4% and they changed the rates for energy.......how much cost that will equal to doesnt' seem to line up with previous models, which is also shown in a few posters data.....
But that wouldn’t make sense because the old GC’s that were on the normal/hard nodes had similar energy refill and costs. So if the drop rate was cut in half, I’m curious to know the reasoning.
There's never been a chase on a normal energy node. They've all been fleet or cantina.
Not bragging, just saying that just because some don't get any doesn't mean no one gets any, and the ones that get close to none are more likely to complain on the boards.
this. they have always been on the "more expensive" refreshed energies, that had the longer refresh time.
There was never a chase on ls/ds energy, only cantina and fleet. Furthermore, this is the first fleet node chase since the change to fleet energy, so the energy refill and costs are different than the other 3 chases.
Details if curious:
Palp Shuttle, Feb 2019, Fleet Energy (source of the original drop rate info)
https://forums.galaxy-of-heroes.starwars.ea.com/discussion/194697/galactic-chase-emperor-s-shuttle
Ebon Hawk, March 2019, Fleet Energy
https://forums.galaxy-of-heroes.starwars.ea.com/discussion/197310/content-update-3-6-2019
Fleet energy refresh changes, July 2019
https://forums.galaxy-of-heroes.starwars.ea.com/discussion/209271/gear-12-farming-changes
Hyena Bomber, October 2019, Cantina Energy (same refresh rate and refill cost as the old fleet energy)
https://forums.galaxy-of-heroes.starwars.ea.com/discussion/217602/galactic-chase-hyena-bomber
"seems right" is your reasoning or backed by some info from the devs?
No due to logic.
It was 4% with a more "expensive" energy system, when you translate this to a "cheaper" energy system a rate of 2% seems right. To keep the relationship to previous events in line.
Yeah, I get this. I just wanted to know if it was confirmed.
Ahhh.
Well I guess it “makes sense” then but would’ve been nice to know that the rates had changed prior to people spending crystals expecting the same drop rate.
And for those saying “use logic, git gud” about different rates for lesser expensive nodes/ refresh rates, god forbid CG does something that benefits the players by keeping drop rates the same
12 attempts at 10 energy/attempt = 2.4 shards.
6 attempts at 20 energy/attempt = 2.4 shards.
For 200 crystal refreshes, that's 1.2 blueprints per 100 crystals spent. And that rate is 20% better than the 100 crystals per blueprint you'd get from shipments, PLUS you also get the normal benefits of farming whatever node. Sure, RNG is going to mean that for some people the gamble doesn't pay off, but for far more than half of folks, it will.
You should only be concerned that this wasn't fair to you if you were purchasing energy refreshes for more than 200 crystals a pop.
That said, I'm not trying to defend CG's lack of updating their per-energy-drop-rate information. If they had never published the drop rate, that would be one thing. But here they have and changed it. They should have provided updated info.
I am, however, saying that the math works out for any refreshes that cost less than or equal to 200 crystals per. If that's all you spent, the lack of info didn't cause you any harm.
pic?
Or those crystals could’ve been spent elsewhere if people weren’t looking to invest twice as many crystals as before just to unlock a ship from previous GC’s.
Nobody is saying that it’s unfair in comparison to the crystal purchases in shipments. That’s not in question. It’s the lack of information that the drop rates differed from previous GL’s. Which, again, comes full circle to their lack of communication and disconnect with the community. Wouldn’t it be prudent of them to have told the player base, “hey this GC has different rates because of different currency and energy refresh rates/cost.” After laying out drop rates from previous GC’s. That’s the problem.
You were right to question my numbers - they were wrong, I miscalculated.
My rate is 0.0266 shards/ship energy.
Here is my really rough math.
Someone feel free to correct me if I've done something wrong.
Red is the Cantina or OLD Fleet Rates. Blue is the NEW Fleet Rates we are seeing today.
So obviously the base 120/day v/s 240/day is the same.
But right off the bat the free 45 at 6PM is now worth 1/2 as many Shards.
It gets worse when dealing w/ Refreshes.
The 1st 3 give you the same "rate" per crystal spent BUT, the minute you go to double rate today to make up for the lower drop % you start to loose out massively.
I've compared 3 Refreshes at 100 crystals each under the old system compared to 5 refreshes today under the new system for 350 crystals.
As you can see its MORE expensive and you get LESS shards.
All I can say is for programmers, they are not good at basic math.
But feel free to correct me if I have something wrong. I am doing this while taking a class at work so multitasking
Yeah, I am surprised CG hasn't confirmed this by now today. I get it may have been easy to overlook, but all it takes is a simple update stating the new drop rate formula in a post.
Ok. No not yet.
This is more or less in line with what I found in my post on the previous page. The amount of shards you get off the regen is the same, though the daily collection accounts for a little difference. The big change is on refreshes since you need about twice the number of refreshes to get a given number of shards. While the refreshes do start at a lower cost, they end up costing more after 100 crystals (1 cantina vs 2 current fleet) because costs increase exponentially. For example, using a 3x100 cantina, you'd need 3x50 and 3x100 for a 300 vs 450 crystal cost to be equivalent expected shards.
In all previous chase events, i could get 5 and a half stars in the 5 days, using 6 energy refreshes (450 crystals a day) and preloading 6 refreshes before midnight on the first day. but doing that this time has earned me squat.
Edit: i think cg has plugged in the GL ticket formula instead of the chase formula.
i would more go the way that they know exactly what they did there
last galactic chase was a while ago
the game got more expensive since then with requirements for everything
why should they lower the costs in this kind of event?
they will just continue to get as much from the top spenders as possible
considering that you could pretty much meet the requirements for events with a single vault even if you didnt plan ahead accordingly or hoarded a lot
a vault doesnt get you anywhere these days
my assessment. i created a bug report, since i hadn't seen one on this yet.
There has been no false advertising. They haven't stated the chance per energy for this Galactic Chase. You are assuming the rate is the same as previous chases.
I believe above Kyno said he has asked and they are looking into it. Not everything needs a bug report.
I'd guessing poor communication (or someone pressing something they shouldn't have). As Ultra pointed out earlier in the thread, we now get more energy than we did last Chase. It wouldn't surprise me if they've adjusted the drop rate in-line with that. Data certainly seems to suggest they have.
We just need them to come out and say what it is now, or if someone has broken stuff. Kyno says they have been made aware, so know its just wait and see what they say.
They only announced it in one, and if you read that post it doesnt say this rate is for Galactic Chase events, but for the blueprints of "the new ship ..."
So it was not advertised for the event, but for the ship.