Guild Wars 2

Originally posted this on GW2Guru, but I think this site gets more traffic.

I am beginning what will be for me a long term goal of getting a Legendary Weapon before any expansions come out. With that being said, I have decided to tackle the mystic clovers first since they have the element of randomness, and once I have them, I can basically make a shopping list for the rest.

I have set myself a starter goal of 250e, 250 coins, 250 Obby shards, 150 SP.

I have read alot of conflicting advice as to which route is “better”. The one at a time recipe, or the 10 at a time recipe.

I realize that “better” is somewaht subjective here, but here is what I mean by it: which of the two give better “failed” results.

I expect to fail alot, lol. I think the one at a time recipe has a more stable clover chance, since 250 individual gambles have a better chance of evening out than 25. But I would rather choose the method that sets me up better with the failed attempts.

Also, is there any use for the crystals if I end up with extra? I don’t really want to buy 250 and end up with 50 left over with no use and waste SP’s. On the other had I don’t want to go back and forth buying them 10 at a time.

Thanks in advance, and good luck to all of you in your legendary hunts as well!

As far as I know, we don’t really have enough information on either of those recipes to provide solid advice on what the best method of obtaining clovers is.

The huge unknown is the 10x item recipe. The 1x recipe appears to produce clovers 1/3 of the time, according to The Internet. We don’t really know what the drop rate is on the 10x recipe (or, if anyone knows, they aren’t willing to say yet – information might be more forthcoming after everyone has the world-firsts out of their systems).

If we assume that the rate of clover creation is the same for both recipes, then on average it doesn’t matter which recipe you use. The expectation value is the same for both recipes (with the obvious caveat that, if you use the 10x recipe, you will want to get to 70 clovers then swap to the 1x recipe since you only need 77 clovers, not 80).

However, there will be variance from the average. That’s why, assuming the drop rates on clovers are identical for both recipes, most people suggest you stick to the 1x recipe. It’s a risk vs. reward problem. If you use the 10x recipe, you have a higher risk of using much more material should you be “unlucky”. If you use the 1x recipe, you have a much lower chance of a reward should you be “lucky.” Essentially 10x would be high risk and higher potential for a reward, while 1x is lower risk and lower potential for a reward.

I’d say it depends on your personal risk tolerance and how you will feel about your progress increments. On average it shouldn’t much matter, and I personally will probably do lots of 10x if the rate remains in question because it won’t bother me to get a bad streak. Most people get really angry if they use up a lot of money to try to make something and then get no progress towards their goal. If you are one of those people, or you can’t handle the risk of wasted materials, then you should stick to the 1×.

Thanks for the nice response. I myself an leaning towards the 10x option, at least for my first 100 or so materials. If I get no clovers I may go to the 1x recipe. My only quam was that I read in a post or two that some people thought that you could get some T5 mats out of the 1x recipe. If that is the case, I will stick to the 10 the whole way as even a failed attempt that gets me t6 mats moves me towards my goal, even if it is more slowly.

Here is a list that you might find helpful. Was posted by someone who kept track of the results from each of his 1x clover attempts

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/pub?key=0AiRn91qaiRaydEsyZXBRenRiMUJ1b0dmWkIxczlSN1E&output=html

Thanks, deathTouch! Until now, I didn’t realize that the Mystic Clover recipe always gives you SOMETHING, and that something is often crafting mats that are required in other parts of the Legendary recipe. That makes it MUCH more worthwhile.