Gem recruit question

[I8apuss]

Do you prefer the 11 recruits for 500 or 10 individual pulls?

I've done it both ways and I'm starting to think I'm getting more 6* cards doing individual pulls.

[ZOOT]

thats what i thought too!!!

[Bigbadjohn]

It is almost certainly better in the long run and on average to do single card draws, however I do have a friend I introduced who has NEVER seen a 6* card doing this and is now on 18 draws. In fact they have not yet got a useful card from gem draws! Luckily they recently got Naga and SS from the shop and managed to pick up 2 fire panzers so can actually move forward now in the game.

[Midas]

We discuss this question long time ago - viewtopic.php?f=36&t=11666&start=40#p20927

it actually IS better to recruit 50 gems at a time for better chances at multiple 6* than to just settle for 1. I've tested both first hand

But now 500 gem recruit have 100 bonus miles. (This is proof that single recruit is better, so PM boost 500 recruit)
And it somehow change values of this two actions.

[Ragnarok72]

So in return for offering a guaranteed 6* PM lowers the odds for other decent 6* cards inthe 500 gem draw... Seems very strange to me. Could admin verify, or is this just common 'bad luck'?

[Durst]

But now 500 gem recruit have 100 bonus miles. (This is proof that single recruit is better, so PM boost 500 recruit)

Clever Good thinking, Midas.

Could admin verify, or is this just common 'bad luck'?

I'm curious too, though I dislike pressuring admin... so many of us to deal with

[admin]

I will post the actual mechanic so there won't be any more guessing or false theories. The chance of getting any of the 6* card (or any card period), per each card drawn, is exactly the same if you draw 1 at a time or 11 at a time. The only difference is how the 6-star card is guaranteed for the 500 gems spent:

- For single card draws, we record number of cards you drew that in a row that is below 6*. If you draw 9 in-a-row below 6-star using single card draw, we guarantee the 10th one is a 6-star.
- For the 11 card draw, we first draw 10 cards (with exact same odds as single cards), and if all 10 of them is not a 6* card, we guarantee the 11th being a 6 star* card.

The guaranteed 6* have the same chances of being a "great" 6-star cards in either method. This means if you have already draw several single card-draws without seeing a 6-star, then the single card draw might be a better value until you get a 6* card. If you haven't drawn cards or you just recently drew a 6-star card from single card draw, then 11-card draw may be a better potential value. Another minor advantage we added recently added to the 11-card draw is prevent duplicate cards within the draw, which has a unnoticeable effect of very slightly alter odds in favor of better cards. Even though it's using same odds for each card during the draw, luck may vary, and it sounds like some players may have experienced better luck drawing one-at-time. We do have many player that always do 11-card draws as well.

[Durst]

Interesting! I will definitely be sticking to single-card draw from now on.

Both methods have a "guaranteed 6-star drop" which occurs if you have already drawn a number of cards and have not received a six-star, and this is the part you want to exploit. The difference between the two methods is that when you pay for the 500-gem recruit, you go straight from card 1 to card 11. That "guarantee" only applies once, right at the eleventh card. With the single-card draw, your counter starts over every time you get a new six-star, instead of when you start a new 11 cards. I'll draw up an example, but it may not be very easy to understand.

Example
For a given 33 drawn cards, imagine the sequence is 454465564454445455654454445445454. In other words, your first card is a 4 star, then a 5, then two 4's, then a 6, then two more 5's, etc. The same sequence, when split up based on your purchases, would look like like this:

(G = guaranteed 6-star, | = price equalizer)
-------------------------------------------G---------------G---------
Singular-draw: 4544655644|5444545665|4454445465|(454)
500gem-draw: 45446556445|44454556544|54445445456|
-----------------------------------------------------------------G----

Okay, so the chart is split up based on the amount of cards you'd get with 500 gems (with a | in between each 500 gems). With the single-draw method, you get 10 cards for every 500 gems. The first 10 are five 4*'s, three 5*'s, and two 6*'s. With multi-draw, you get 11 cards--same as the previous example, but with an extra 5*, in this case. So you get one card ahead by the second method. However, when you start the next 500 gems, the single-card method's guarantee-counter has already counted two cards (a pair of 4's), while the multi-card draw's counter resets to zero. As we proceed through the next stream of 4's and 5's, the counters continue to count up, until we hit our first "G" for singular-draw. See, it's been 9 cards since the single-card method gave a 6*, so the tenth card, underneath the G, is guaranteed a 6*. But since the very next card in the sequence happens by luck to also be a 6*, the multi-draw method's counter is disabled--and you don't get a guaranteed card for that method the way you did with the first method! As the sequence goes on, each method produces one more 6*, both through guarantees. In the end, the single-draw method gets three less cards (it can only get 30 cards for 1500 gems, where the 11-card draw can get 33), but for this sequence, they're just more 4's and 5's. The single-draw method gets five 6*'s from this method and the multi-draw only gets four.

Obviously this is just one out of billions of available sequences. The multi-draw method will always get more cards, so it will have more chances of producing a 6* by luck, and with the majority of sequences, you'd see no difference in the number of 6*'s drawn between one method and the other. However I'd rather gamble on the shorter, 10-card guarantee that only resets when you get a 6* (rather than every time you make a new draw) than on the longer, 11-card guarantee that only counts during specified iterations of 11 cards.

If my ramblings make sense to a single person on this forum, it will all have been worth it

[admin]

I think what Durst is basically saying is that the guarantee mechanism for single-card draws has higher chances of kicking in more frequently over long strings of draws. This sounds like correct, but it may hard to determine whether that is enough to compensate for other advantages of the 11-card draws.

[Durst]

I think what Durst is basically saying is that the guarantee mechanism for single-card draws has higher chances of kicking in more frequently over long strings of draws. This sounds like correct, but it may hard to determine whether that is enough to compensate for other advantages of the 11-card draws.

Wish I could've said it in two sentences