Talk:Zaishen Strongbox

Stuff I got from it
10 Flasks of firewater and 3 Zaishen Tonics so far, research still continues. ~ Fab ian  22:18, 2 June 2011 (UTC)
 * (NOT SIGNED IN) I got an Everlasting Ghostly Priest Tonic.
 * From which strongbox? --Musha [[Image:User_Musha_Sigc.png|19px]] 20:11, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

I got a Z-Key
Very first strongbox I got gave me a Zaishen Key. --ScorpDeception63 22:27, 2 June 2011 (UTC)
 * People in my alliance have been getting green items Rikk Panda 22:32, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

Something new?
I got something called a Party Beacon, never seen one before, can't find any info anywhere about it. It says it has one use. Has the description "Get the party started!"

The Party Beacon are fireworks that give you 50 party pts.--Camilla (3-Jun-2011)192.53.187.162 17:51, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

formating of this page.
it should follow the Zaishen Coin's example of how the page should be layed out so what you get from them should be on the individual pages.- Zesbeer 22:58, 2 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Spotted that about the same time, I should really just avoid putting new pages up when content changes... so many conflicts you spend more time resolving them than understanding what the change is, guess when the icons are available we can use a similar table to the Zaishen Coin page has. ⁓[[Image:User Nela_Sig.png]] Nela  - (talk) 23:02, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

Intro
This item is not a reward for successfully competing in "various" pvp formats. It is ONLY a reward for killing the guild lord in gvg. As of today, it is ALSO a quest reward for quests given by Zenjal. --Musha 00:46, 3 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Maybe you're thinking about Champion's Zaishen Strongbox? The other three strongboxes are aquired outside of GvG, without harming a guild lord. The specifics of "successfully competing" are dependent on the format and listed on each strongboxes page. Tub 00:54, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

items
each format's strongbox contains an exclusive minipet and two everlasting tonics that you can only obtain from playing in that format. so those are going to drop from each format and i see on some of the sub pages there are tonics on them but no minipets yet so..- Zesbeer 09:23, 3 June 2011 (UTC)
 * I am not sure about exclusive, a guild mate of mine got an El Priest from GvG version, and someone else confirmed he got it from a HA version-Wracken 22:15, 3 June 2011 (UTC)
 * thats directly quoted from anet. as seen here under zstrongbox-[[Image:User_Zesbeer_sig.png|link=User talk:Zesbeer‎]] Zesbeer 22:18, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

this post from someone who often fiddles with gw.dat lists 8 EL tonics and 4 miniatures. Here are rough translations for the tonics: And miniatures: Assigning them to the proper strongbox seems problematic due to some edits that were made without prior confirmation. Tub 14:32, 4 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Guild Lord confirmed -- Moto   Saxon  18:09, 8 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Knight Hero's Strongbox confirmed -- Moto   Saxon  18:09, 8 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Avatar of Balthazar confirmed -- Moto   Saxon  18:09, 8 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Priest of Balthazar
 * Ghostly Hero
 * Balthazar's Champion
 * Ghostly Priest
 * Lesser Flame Sentinel
 * Minature High Priest Zhang confirmed -- Moto   Saxon  18:09, 8 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Minature Ghostly Priest confirmed -- Moto   Saxon  18:09, 8 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Minature Rift Warden confirmed -- Moto   Saxon  18:09, 8 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Minature Guild Lord Champions Strongbox confirmed -- Moto   Saxon  18:19, 8 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Seen swarm of bees tonic aswell and someone claiming to have a miniature version of it. Seen a bone dragon tonic aswell but can't remember if it's new or old.60.234.197.191 14:50, 5 June 2011 (UTC)
 * that information might be useful but it still dost tell us which box has which item. and until we have that figured out the pages need to have the stub tag.-[[Image:User_Zesbeer_sig.png|link=User talk:Zesbeer‎]] Zesbeer 21:41, 5 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Can you only do each quest once per account?24.17.46.24 07:08, 8 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Please review this page. User_Ryuu_R.jpg‎ Ryuu    *bite*  07:23, 8 June 2011 (UTC)
 * I'm checking off the el tonics and minis as i find them in game. most ppl dont remember which box they came from. I got the el knight from the heros box.

Drop Rate
Can someone create a drop rate page with a template to add our drops? We should either have 4 pages (one for each box type), one page with four sub drop rate boxes, or combine all four box type drops into one drop rate (assuming that the that el tonics and mini's all drop at the same rate). -- Moto   Saxon  17:55, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

Which box drops which item?
I think we have gotten things very confused. Each strongbox only drops one mini and one of two possible EL tonics; we have listed up to 4 and 8 of each. I've created the following table to start to keep track of which box drops which item. (Sorry, Moto, I realize this overlaps with your efforts.)

Please only add a confirmation if you have personally seen the item drop from the particular box. If more than one of an item dropped (e.g. zoins), then please also indicate how many in the Notes column (updating either the min or the max). If all you have seen is that the tonic or mini exists, then leave the red in the box column.

I believe that we can quickly get confirmation for most of the items and use this to update the relevant articles. — Tennessee Ernie Ford ( TEF ) 18:31, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

(continue discussion here)


 * thanks for the nifty list. It should help keep things civilized :) -- Moto   Saxon  18:56, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

Which item/which box results
(please use this section to post results only; use the section above to discuss)


 * Wouldn't it be safe to say the mini/tonic associated with each of the pvp formats match? Ghostly priest mini - Hero's strongbox, ghostly hero tonic - hero's strongbox, Guild lord mini - champions strongbox24.17.46.24 19:51, 9 June 2011 (UTC)
 * No, it would not. 4 boxes, 4 minis; 1 mini per box. You've listed 2 different minis coming from the same box, and we know that's not the case. --Musha [[Image:User_Musha_Sigc.png|19px]] 19:55, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

Alternative presentation for confirming contents
This is what we are saying so far.

Discussion of contents
It seems strange to me that the only thing different between the boxes might be the minis and the EL tonics;. (Seems like a lot of trouble on Anet's part to provide four sources for nearly identical contents.) — Tennessee Ernie Ford ( TEF ) 04:39, 15 June 2011 (UTC)
 * I think they simply differ in the scale/probability of drops. I don't have any hard data to back this up yet, but it seems to me that larger quantitites of rewards (particularly more valuable rewards such as gold/silver zcoin, zkeys, and flames) drop from boxes rewarded for high-end arenas (gvg/HA) while gladiator/codex boxes have a lower probability of dropping valuable rewards in significant number. For now I think it's good that we've got a pretty clear idea of which items drop from which boxes and any conclusion about drop rates would have to be made after many more datapoints are collected.--TahiriVeila 14:13, 17 June 2011 (UTC)


 * That's a compelling theory: the lower-value contents might be the same, but the drop rates and/or the drop quantities are different. (That means that we should find a way to record both item and count, unlike what we do for Royal Gifts.) — Tennessee Ernie Ford ( TEF ) 16:03, 17 June 2011 (UTC)
 * How would you go about doing that?--TahiriVeila 19:41, 17 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Personally, it makes sense to me that all 4 boxes would drop the same things with the same drop rates. The only difference being the mini and el tonics. gvg may be harder then ra...but you need more consecutive wins in ra then gvg to get a box. obviously we won't know until we have done more drop rate research, but i think the required consecutive wins is how anet balances the strongbox drop rate. -- Moto   Saxon  19:52, 17 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Modify the template we use. There are three likely approaches:
 * Record the count only. Pro: simple to fill in and easy to figure out the average amount/gift, e.g. Glads 35, Hero 25. Con: no independent check on total opened; easy for people to get wrong if they are used to how RGs work. Also: hard to calculate chance of zoin dropping.
 * Use two parameters for variable amounts, the fact of a drop and the amount. Pro: allows us to compute chance of drop and likely amount, easier to validate. Con: confusing, especially given how many items can drop.
 * Collect just the does it drop data for a few months, until we can publish drop rate data that we trust. Then, add a new collection table for amounts. (A variety of ways to do this.) Pro: the amount data won't have to be reconciled or separated from the rate data. Con: more laborious and we won't have amount results for a long time.


 * None of these are ideal, but some are easier for those who want to add their data. At the moment, I'm actually more worried about how to make sure that someone isn't recording the results for Glads on the Hero page or vice versa. It seems clear that a lot of people think the boxes are interchangeable. This might be a rare situation in which we should ask for help from the devs before we start collecting data, to make sure we aren't going about it the wrong way. — Tennessee Ernie Ford ( TEF ) 20:02, 17 June 2011 (UTC)
 * What about a combination of #1 & #3? Do a table like for royal gifts where we just record the fact of a drop and ignore the quantity. But have people list the quantity for each item as well. That way we can get a drop rate percentage fairly quickly and be able to factor in quantities of drops at our leisure at a later date.--TahiriVeila 20:08, 17 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Data collection is a tricky business. It's hard to ensure its accuracy in the best circumstances. So, I tend to aim for simpler approaches. Based on what we've seen so far (for these boxes) and what we see every year for lunar fortunes and the like, I would hesitate to trust results if we combined #1 and #3 too soon.


 * However, let's see what other folks have to say, too. If veterans and IPs want to see a somewhat complicated data collection effort...then we can make it work as smoothly as possible. Otherwise, we can repeat what we've done for Royal Gifts. (At the cost of not being able to validate your theory anytime soon, unfortunately — I would like to do that.) — Tennessee Ernie Ford ( TEF ) 20:23, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

Contents data
Please update if you can confirm/deny whether something belongs on the list below.

One table to rule them all? (Drop rate data collection)
Should we collect drop rate data for the four z-boxes using a single page instead of using four different tables?
 * Pros
 * We don't have to worry about whether we nailed down the contents correctly for each box.
 * It's slightly more likely that people will correctly identify which box they opened since they have to specify it (rather than click a link).


 * Cons
 * There's some risk of confusion, since we have never done this before for other gift-like items (although: we've never had four nearly-identical ones either).
 * We would have to create a new template type that could accommodate the 5 types of totals (one subtotal for each of four boxes and a super-total for the lot).


 * Other thoughts
 * If we go this route, we would re-direct the four potential drop rate pages to Zaishen Strongbox/Drop rate.
 * There is some interest in learning whether it's more likely to get the max number of e.g. Zoins from one box type rather than another; this suggestion doesn't address that issue.

— Tennessee Ernie Ford ( TEF ) 22:51, 21 June 2011 (UTC)


 * While the four boxes seem identical except for which specific miniature or tonic is given out (a combined table would just have a "mini" and "tonic" line, I suppose), I think it's too early to draw conclusions. It's been a while since my stats class, but as I recall we need several thousand openings per box to conclude that the drop rates are identical. Short a dev response, I'd rather go through the headache of merging tables later than the headache of separating data from one table if we find an inconsistency (and possibly having tp discard data in that case, if the combined table gets sloppy in the meantime). -- Armond Warblade[[Image:User Armond sig image.png]] 23:58, 21 June 2011 (UTC)


 * I'm sorry I wasn't clear: each line would specify the box it came from; we just wouldn't use four tables to collect the data, when because many of the results drops are the same. I believe that the headache of collecting good data (burden on the player) is greater than the annoyance of separating the data later (burden on us). We would not have a "mini" or "tonic" column; we would have 4 mini columns and 8 tonic columns (that would, btw, provide some independent check that the particular line was filled in correctly). — Tennessee Ernie Ford ( TEF ) 00:36, 22 June 2011 (UTC)


 * I see. Then, so long as there were some method of sorting via strongbox, I don't see any disadvantage to this proposal besides the increase in (or perhaps redistribution of) workload. -- Armond Warblade[[Image:User Armond sig image.png]] 00:48, 22 June 2011 (UTC)

As long as there's an obvious means of determining which drops come from which box, a single table should be okay. I'm just worried that it would be more confusing to have all the data in one table than it would be to have separate tables or even separate pages.--67.159.5.242 03:02, 22 June 2011 (UTC)


 * I had a thought: What if we had four separate tables and one "totals" row or something that spans all the tables? -- Armond Warblade[[Image:User Armond sig image.png]] 07:57, 22 June 2011 (UTC)


 * I'm worried about the fact that ppls don't always seem to distinguish between the boxes. If there's one table, everyone visits the same page and specifies later which one. If there are multiple tables, it's easier for them to be on the wrong page without noticing (it's going to look very similar). In other words, I think we should look at ways to reduce data entry errors before they happen.


 * If we do go with tradition and use four tables, I like that idea; it would be helpful to summarize the data in one spot (e.g. drop rate data for this page). — Tennessee Ernie Ford ( TEF ) 08:27, 22 June 2011 (UTC)
 * One more thing to consider is updating the totals. Would the existing scripts work with a joined table, or is someone willing and able to adjust them to work?
 * I'm convinced we should keep 4 separate tables for now, but it seems to be a good idea to keep them on the same page. Ideally we'd have a total line for each table and one for all data combined, allowing us to spot differences. Tub 10:23, 22 June 2011 (UTC)
 * That seems optimal to me. @TEF, how difficult would it be to summarize all the data from 4 separate tables into a single conclusion?--Four Year Strong 18:41, 22 June 2011 (UTC)


 * In theory, it shouldn't be that bad. (I have 20% confidence that I would be able to manage it, but we have people here who could.) Essentially, (if they aren't already usable as variables), we tag the totals rows from the four drop rate tables, then present & sum them up on this article's (yet to be created) drop table. (We might have to tweak the tables slightly and rename some of the variables to be compatible, e.g. we cannot use "mini;" we'll have to specify which).


 * However: there's no rush to do that. Let's make sure that (a) we have solid tables (we don't yet; we are still missing correct columns for EL tonics) and (b) that people are +/- posting correctly. Summarized data will be interesting, but not as important as good data collection. — Tennessee Ernie Ford ( TEF ) 20:30, 22 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Summarized data likely won't be useful for several months, at which point we can check if each (or even every) strongbox conforms to an average of some sort. -- Armond Warblade[[Image:User Armond sig image.png]] 21:21, 22 June 2011 (UTC)