internetz wrote:The whole "frags from chests" exploit problem could be easily solved by making the frags that drop from chests only able to unlock that kind of bp. ex: golden chests drop golden bp frags, which can only be used towards unlocking golden bps. they could be combined with the normal blue bp frags from other activities to open their type of bp, but you would be unable to use a golden frag to unlock a magic, leather, iron, wood, primal, or dwarvish chest bp. Combining this with the "don't offer bp frags after all bps for that chest type have been unlocked" idea would of course be necessary.

Workable I guess, though you'd still need to increase chest opening price or decrease chest bp chance if you didn't want to affect current balance.

Although, affecting the current balance seems to be what most people are advocating, which isn't surprising given that OP's first and second posts gripe about that primarily:

Imasock wrote:Can't there be something actually worthwhile contained in a chest? 10k gems for a single blueprint when there's 50+ in ONE type of chest is bonkers. And you wonder why people are leaving this game...

Imasock wrote:I understand that blueprints are not supposed to flow out from chests every roll, but even if you went with the generous estimate of one blueprint in every 3 chests, that's 54x 1500 = 81,000 gems ($447 at bulk cost). That's _just_ to get the 54 blueprints for magic chests.

If the goal is just to reduce the expected cost to acquire bps, just advocate for decreasing the chest opening cost rather than for implementing convoluted fragment-based models. If, on the other hand, we want to have an honest discussion about whether the randomness of bps is unfair enough that the model should be changed, we should probably look at the actual distribution of chests to unlock a given tier.

Below are the calculated mean chest opens required and the standard deviation of chest opens using a negative binomial model. (For these purposes the slightly positive skew isn't being considered, because ignoring it overestimates the magnitude of the negative outcome for the unluckiest players).

Golds BPs (10% bp chance):

Mean - 360

Std. Dev. - 56.9

Magic BPs (25% bp chance):

Mean - 232

Std. Dev. - 26.4

Applying the std. deviation to the right-tail of the distribution to look at the impact on "unlucky" players:

GoldOnly 25% of players will have to open more than 398 chests (398 chests is 11% more than average);

Only 10% of players will have to open more than 433 chests (433 chests is 20% more than average);

Only 5% of players will have to open more than 453 chests (453 chests is 26% more than average);

Only 2.5% of players will have to open more than 472 chests (472 chests is 31% more than average); and

Only 1% of players will have to open more than 493 chests (493 chests is 37% more than average).

MagicOnly 25% of players will have to open more than 250 chests (250 chests is 8% more than average);

Only 10% of players will have to open more than 266 chests (266 chests is 15% more than average);

Only 5% of players will have to open more than 275 chests (275 chests is 19% more than average);

Only 2.5% of players will have to open more than 284 chests (284 chests is 22% more than average); and

Only 1% of players will have to open more than 293 chests (293 chests is 26% more than average).

*Note that I'm only measuring chests and not assigning an expected cost, as I haven't attempted (and don't have the data to attempt to) model in possible epic/leg/mythic drops that impact the effective cost of unlocking the tier.*Personally, I see nothing about these distriubtions that warrant the amount of rage it seems to induce. Based on some preliminary modeling, mastery procs have a far wider distribution between "winners" and "losers".