uggg, 64 bucks, and Bad Luck.

Open 27 packs of garbage and say that again...

Not sure I agree with you. 'Percent' by definition is 'per hundred'. So, if the drop rate is 1%, that literally translates to '1 per hundred'.

How exactly do you come to the conclusion that the odds are much higher than 1% of getting 1 of X if you buy 100 packs?!

The percentage of drops in the packs for stuff that people want is downright insulting. What an absolute scam. I don't know who is more shameful, the people who waste money on the stupid things or the devs for ripping people off so blatantly.

Get robbed at gunpoint and say that again... sheesh, you honestly think opening 27 packs of garbage (ie. buyng 27 lottery tickets and not winning) is worse than someone threatening your life?

That implies that nobody wants anything except the extremely rare items.

But judging by the pricing of even the more common sets on the GTN (previous pack exluded) would suggest that people want even the more common stuff.

It's not the devs fault! If you think about it, the Cartel Market arguably saved SWTOR. If you don't like it, don't participate. Apparently there are lots of players who love it.

If they increased the odds, everyone would have the 'rare' items, and then they wouldn't be as desirable. Then no one would buy the packs! Pretty clever design IMO, but really nothing new or groundbreaking. Gambling is as old as dirt.

They need to get rid of the odds and just make each gear set, toy, mount, crystal, cost a defined amount of money based on the determined value/rarity it "deserves". If things are not selling they will naturally readjust to sell. RNG is not a good idea; which bioware should have already learned from in their Battlemaster bags. It's a worse idea ten-fold when people are paying real money.

I think he was trying to be hyperbolic. (wow I used my last word of English for this week, I... must.... stop... typing...)

Let's say they do away with the Cartel packs and take your advice. They determine the price the new walker mounts 'deserve' is $50. 5,000 people buy it at $50, and then a week later no one else buys it so they 'naturally readjust' the price to $25. Should the 5,000 people who just paid $50 get a $25 refund? Or is that the price they pay for being early adopters?!

And really if you think about it, I bet they make a LOT more money using the RNG approach with packs than they would selling these items individually for a set cost.

well 10/1000, 100/100,000 are all 1%
% is a ratio of x/y normalized to 100
.1% is actually 1/1000 normalized to .1/100

The odds of any event occurring on an individual attempt is 1% (assumed that all events are independent)
The more attempts you make the higher your chances of success go up. But in general the "odds" need to be taken over a large number of samples to approach their expected value.

for instance you could open 100 packs get 100 items at the 1% rate, then proceed to open 9900 more packs and get none. Thus you have 100/10000 and still maintain your 1%

The odds of an independent event occurring are the % the chances of hitting that event given N number of attempts is (1-x)^n where x is the % and n is the number of attempts.

again go back to my dice roll example where you try to roll a 6 out of how many tries.

Or think of it this way have 2 marbles 1 blue one green both sitting in a bag how many tries do you need to draw the blue marble if you replace it every time you draw one.

answer potentially infinite, realistically solve (.5)^n for n until you get a small enough number that should ensure you have drawn at least one blue marble. (3 attempts is 87.5% chance you drew a blue one, 5 attempts is a 97% chance you have drawn a blue one, 10 attempts is a 99.91% chance you have drawn a blue one). So after 10 attempts you are around a .01% chance of NOT having drawn a blue marble at least once. Not zero but pretty small