I am trying to model the probablility of getting heirloom shards when you open a single pack.
Like I said in my post, I'm assuming that as long as you haven't opened 499 packs without getting heirloom shards there is a fixed probablility p of getting heirloom shards. But since you are guaranteed to get them after opening 499 packs without them this has a particular effect on the average number of packs needed.
Mathematically this has to do with the fact that the probability of getting shards from a single pack is not independent from how many packs you've openend.
Now imagine that you get to open 500 packs and your last pack just happened to have had heirloom shards (or you start on a new account).
Worst case scenario: after opening 499 packs without shards, the final pack contains heirloom shards. So the worst case scenario is that you have 1 heirloom pack in 500 packs.
A much better scenario would be that after 150 packs you get heirloom shards. The counter resets and you are no longer guaranteed to get heirloom shards in the remaining 350 packs. But if you are lucky you might get heirloom shards after 250 packs. Thus getting two heirlooms in 500 packs.
So:
Worst case scenario: 1 heirloom in 500 packs
Some lucky baster might just get 2 heirlooms in 500 packs.
Thus ON AVERAGE it is no longer 1 in 500 packs. It must be better than this since the worst case is 1 in 500. So it could be 1 in 499 or 1 in 450 packs (for example).
Importantly:
We have assumed thst there is a fixed probability p of getting heirloom shards if you have NOT opened 499 packs without getting shards.
We enforce that after 499 packs without shards you are guaranteed to get shards on your 500th pack.
Now we, the community, do not know the value of p. We only know that it is less then 1% and that it's larger than 0% (some people get heirloom shards before opening 500 packs).
The plot shows how changing the value of p impacts the average packs you need to open to get shards (if p = 100% you would get heirloom shards every single time, but if p=0% you have to wait 500 packs) and what fraction of players would have to open exactly 500 packs.
From there on we can use the following observations:
This leads to us putting bounds on the single pack probability p between 1/500 and 1/2 000 (or 1/5000 or so)
This does not mean that equals the number of packs you need to open it just inpacts it.
The average packs that you would need to open to get shards is then still close to 1 in 500.
If the probabilities themselves are not your thing, I hope that youtube tutorials could explain them better then I can.
This is some good work here man. As I see it from just observation, the chance MUST be far lower than 1/500. Else we'd see posts around the net all the time from people getting them very early, given the number of players. Not so many such reports are received, only enough to know that it is possible.
I recently received heirloom shards. If it wasn't my 500th pack, it was very close. I knew for certain that I was within ~30 packs of 500 when I got it (not that my own anecdote is terribly relevant).
@Anjunakrokus wrote:.
Mathematically this has to do with the fact that the probability of getting shards from a single pack is not independent from how many packs you've openend.
@Anjunakrokus my brain hurts 😃 I read and reread your posts, and even googled a bit to see if I could grasp what you were positing. And no it's clearly beyond my pay grade.
How can it not be Independant, as a packs number opened is a number lost into the ether and has no bearing on the next packs outcome? Other than pack 500. And with packs are we not talking about whole numbers?
To add to your probability sums, I got my shards for €43 as part of the anniversary event last year, combined with lots of crafting materials and a few spare coins and a ea play membership (€1) giving a shop discount of 10%.
@OldTreeCreeper wrote:
@Anjunakrokus my brain hurts 😃 I read and reread your posts, and even googled a bit to see if I could grasp what you were positing. And no it's clearly beyond my pay grade.
Thats the beauty of it, but the results can be read, there is a feact that there is a fixed chance of getting shards from 1-499 apex pack opening, but the fact that you have a 100% chance on 500 makes that a thing. The chance technically dont change if you are on pack 1 or pack 499 but you can add dimentions to this and calculate a statistical spread on where most people get their packs and create statistics on this. So @Anjunakrokus tried to calculate his version of this and explained what he did to do this, if you are a statistician you can evaluate or even suggest a different approach or if you are not you can evaluate and read the results and just enjoy that someone actually took the time to do this, I think its awesome :D
@OldTreeCreeper wrote:How can it not be Independant, as a packs number opened is a number lost into the ether and has no bearing on the next packs outcome? Other than pack 500. And with packs are we not talking about whole numbers?
So first of all it cannot be independent because you are guaranteed to get an heirloom on pack 500. Which is indeed what I was referring to.
But more annoyingly,there is no actual way to know whether pack 1, pack 239 and pack 456 actually have the same probability.
All we know is that when you open a pack sometimes you get shards.
There is some RNG box which spits out whether or not you get one and we don't know how it works!
I'm making the assumption in my model that they have the same probability, but that's in no way guaranteed.
Another option would be that the probability starts out lower but slowly ramps up as you open more packs. How could we possibly know without Respawn telling us
they said its a fixed chance up to 500 where chance is 100%, the fixed chance <500 is very low but constant (not known exact number though), but that does not mean the statistics will be supporting the technical definition when measuring reality, because if you check the measurements with how many opened shards on their first apex pack vs the people who opened at 420 packs vs 499 packs it will differ for sure, most people I heard got their above 3-400. Sadly only Respawn has the real numbers so its very hard making an accurate model, but you can model based on the information you have to make a best guess model.
Community Manager
