Arena Crystals Awarding Less Units

I am an admitted data nerd. This affliction caused me to begin recording the results of all my Battle Chip usage for Arena Crystals, and the rewards that they yielded, back in August of 2022. Over this time, I have diligently recorded the transaction of 11.9M Battle Chips. I have noticed a change in the crystal rewards that began in March of 2024. I’m going to lay out the results here. I’m interested in hearing from you, Summoners. Have any of you noticed the same, and do you also have data to support it? And I am interested in hearing from you, Kabam. What changed and why? Before I continue, I want to be clear – I am coming at this from a place of curiosity and the search for understanding. I am not directing an accusation at you. However, data does not lie. Something changed.

Before getting into the results, I want to explain my methodology. All of my crystal purchases were in 100K increments. I have purchased a mix of crystals with the following percent distribution: Arena – 72%, Uncollected – 20%, and Thronebreaker – 8%. Despite the mix, I have ensured that all my results are equalized since the three crystals have different costs. My mathematical output is apples-to-apples, as if all the crystals were base Arena Crystals. I am excluding the results of Energy Refills and Punishers, as their drop rates are minute. Those two rewards are statistically insignificant in this evaluation. There were also two 100K Battle Chip crystal purchases in August of 2023 that never showed me the results of the Arena Crystal opening, so those Battle Chips are excluded.

In comparing the reward results from August 2022 through February 2024 versus March 2024 through June 2025, my data shows the following changes: The amount of gold yielded per equalized crystal dropped 0.8%. This is the type of small change to be expected given the amount of data I have. However, the number of units yielded per equalized crystal dropped 14.3%. That is a considerable change. Both my data volume and the consistency of the gold yield on either side of March 1, 2024 eliminate the possibility of RNG as a driver. Something else is happening here. We are being rewarded fewer units over the last 16 months than years prior. I would expect that if the unit return declined 14%, the gold return would increase at an offsetting percentage. However, the result is that Arena Crystals have a lower value than in the past. I do not recall seeing a notification of this change, but perhaps I missed it? I would appreciate having this issue explained and addressed. Most of us grind Arena only for the units. It feels horrible to learn that our time and efforts have been devalued. Thank you in advance for your feedback on this important issue.

Comments

ahmynuts

Wow the fact that @DNA3000 disproved your claims a couple days ago in a different thread not related to this topic before you even posted this is insane 4d chess stuff.

Anyways you are incorrect

SirGamesBond

I was going to spam tin foil meme after reading the header..... but then you threw in all the data. Fair play.

Then again Arena crystal are not Rigged. They are not out to get you. This type of thread we get every sales event.
@DNA3000 also got arena crystal data since the beginning. I'm sure he will share his findings.

RevHeresy

In case anyone is searching in the future, here is my progress so far. No need for % averages, just raw numbers of RNG:

ThroneBreaker per 1m battlechips:
12/20 - 3k units
1/23 - 4,125 units
2/14 - 1,875 units
3/6 - 375 units (this one hurt)
3/27 - 1,875 units
4/15 - 1,125 units
5/6 - zero units. Almost threw my phone against a wall. This is where I shifted to Uncollected.

Uncollected per 1m battlechips:
5/27 - 1,800 units
6/16 - 2,175 units

ahmynuts

In case anyone is searching in the future, here is my progress so far. No need for % averages, just raw numbers of RNG:

ThroneBreaker per 1m battlechips:
12/20 - 3k units
1/23 - 4,125 units
2/14 - 1,875 units
3/6 - 375 units (this one hurt)
3/27 - 1,875 units
4/15 - 1,125 units
5/6 - zero units. Almost threw my phone against a wall. This is where I shifted to Uncollected.

Uncollected per 1m battlechips:
5/27 - 1,800 units
6/16 - 2,175 units

The thronebreaker averages out to around 1767.85 per million battlechips which is just slightly below average

LOSS_MAN

In case anyone is searching in the future, here is my progress so far. No need for % averages, just raw numbers of RNG:

ThroneBreaker per 1m battlechips:
12/20 - 3k units
1/23 - 4,125 units
2/14 - 1,875 units
3/6 - 375 units (this one hurt)
3/27 - 1,875 units
4/15 - 1,125 units
5/6 - zero units. Almost threw my phone against a wall. This is where I shifted to Uncollected.

Uncollected per 1m battlechips:
5/27 - 1,800 units
6/16 - 2,175 units

To put my results in your methodology, it's 1,916 units per 1M Battle Chips pre March 2024, and 1,642 units per 1M BCs since then. Helps us compare.

LOSS_MAN

Wow the fact that @DNA3000 disproved your claims a couple days ago in a different thread not related to this topic before you even posted this is insane 4d chess stuff.

Anyways you are incorrect

I don’t spend time here so my apologies for missing that post. You are entitled to your opinion. However, the crystal yields were so consistent through Mar 2024 that it was palpable. It had flattened so much I almost stopped tracking the data. Then it pivoted - hard! The unit returns dove. The gold remained as consistent as ever. It still is today. The unit returns never returned to a stasis. They are all over. Something happened. Data doesn’t lie.

Buttehrs

Wow the fact that @DNA3000 disproved your claims a couple days ago in a different thread not related to this topic before you even posted this is insane 4d chess stuff.

Anyways you are incorrect
I don’t spend time here so my apologies for missing that post. You are entitled to your opinion. However, the crystal yields were so consistent through Mar 2024 that it was palpable. It had flattened so much I almost stopped tracking the data. Then it pivoted - hard! The unit returns dove. The gold remained as consistent as ever. It still is today. The unit returns never returned to a stasis. They are all over. Something happened. Data doesn’t lie.

Except you only have a small amount of data relatively speaking. So it looks like its off, but when compared to the ongoing data DNA3000 has put together since the dawn of time, its still averaged out to be normal.

ahmynuts

Wow the fact that @DNA3000 disproved your claims a couple days ago in a different thread not related to this topic before you even posted this is insane 4d chess stuff.

Anyways you are incorrect
I don’t spend time here so my apologies for missing that post. You are entitled to your opinion. However, the crystal yields were so consistent through Mar 2024 that it was palpable. It had flattened so much I almost stopped tracking the data. Then it pivoted - hard! The unit returns dove. The gold remained as consistent as ever. It still is today. The unit returns never returned to a stasis. They are all over. Something happened. Data doesn’t lie.

You really dont want to come on the mcoc forum with half-assed data and stats trying to prove something when we literally have the data God emperor on here with more spreadsheets and collected numbers than you could even imagine

LOSS_MAN

Wow the fact that @DNA3000 disproved your claims a couple days ago in a different thread not related to this topic before you even posted this is insane 4d chess stuff.

Anyways you are incorrect
I don’t spend time here so my apologies for missing that post. You are entitled to your opinion. However, the crystal yields were so consistent through Mar 2024 that it was palpable. It had flattened so much I almost stopped tracking the data. Then it pivoted - hard! The unit returns dove. The gold remained as consistent as ever. It still is today. The unit returns never returned to a stasis. They are all over. Something happened. Data doesn’t lie.
You really dont want to come on the mcoc forum with half-assed data and stats trying to prove something when we literally have the data God emperor on here with more spreadsheets and collected numbers than you could even imagine

Fair. I’d be interested in their data cuts from Sep 2022-Feb 2024 vs Mar 2024-current. It’s a primary purpose of my post - seeing what others have experienced.

Gamer

Rng rng after rng.

Johnnoooooo

Today from 11... I definitely think crystals are actually quite fair and normal ATM.. my titans have been abysmal recently but it's how it goes.. next couple might be jean and bastion.. it's how it goes

DNA3000

Wow the fact that @DNA3000 disproved your claims a couple days ago in a different thread not related to this topic before you even posted this is insane 4d chess stuff.

Anyways you are incorrect
I don’t spend time here so my apologies for missing that post. You are entitled to your opinion. However, the crystal yields were so consistent through Mar 2024 that it was palpable. It had flattened so much I almost stopped tracking the data. Then it pivoted - hard! The unit returns dove. The gold remained as consistent as ever. It still is today. The unit returns never returned to a stasis. They are all over. Something happened. Data doesn’t lie.

It is interesting you find the sudden change to be suspicious, and not the fact that the data was "flat" for an extended period of time while buying crystals in only 100k BC batches. That would be only ten TB crystals, which cannot possibly have been generating consistent results Even fifty UC crystals is not enough to generate consistent results: your data should have been wobbling all over the place.

You say about 12 million BC worth of data across about 34 months (August 2022 to present). Assuming roughly even amounts of BC over time, that would mean the data from March 2024 to now would be about four out of the 34 months, or about 1.4 million BC worth of data. Depending on which crystals you're opening, that's not a lot of data. It is 28 TB crystals, 140 UC crystals, or 700 basic crystals. Even 700 is a relatively small sample size. Here's all of my UC crystals, opened from February 2020 to April 2021, in terms of units per batch of one hundred crystals:

The units per batch swing up and down, as you'd expect. On average only 15% of crystals contain units, so even in a batch of a hundred you'd only expect about 15 unit drops. Very small changes to that number due to random chance are going to cause the units per batch to also change by a lot. And if you look at the seven batch moving average, you can also see that the average units per 700 crystals also changes within that data set, from a high of over 2200 to a low of about 1500. This is all statistically normal.

Since I only open TB crystals these days, I've only opened two batches of arena crystals since then, one for 2250 units and one for 375. The average of the two is only about 1300 units, but I wouldn't conclude anything from just 40 crystals. In another thread I posted a chart of all my TB crystals from 2021 to present. Here's that chart with some better annotation:

As far as I can tell, that seems reasonably random, and if anything until the very last batch (May 10) the moving average was trending upward. However, I don't have enough data to completely rule such a thing out. But conversely, without actually seeing data, given the past history of claims about the crystal odds eventually turning out to be nothing, I would need a lot more evidence to convince me there's anything other than random variations going on. In particular, I take note of this statement of yours:

My mathematical output is apples-to-apples, as if all the crystals were base Arena Crystals.

That's suspicious, because there's no way to do that. Statistically speaking the expected average value of units per battlechip is independent of which crystal you open, but the expected statistical variation is highly dependent. To put it another way, seeing an average of 3000 units from a million BC worth of basic arena crystals is statistically significant, but seeing an average of 3000 units from a million BC of TB arena crystals is statistically meaningless. The fact that you're reporting blended averages across different crystal types means there's no way to ascertain whether your results are statistically meaningful.

RevHeresy

With all the other RNG posts, we can’t make sense of random as much as our human brains want something more controlled or predictable.

Toproller89

If you want safe and consistent unit acquisition, always, ALWAYS go the standard 2k arena crystals

Halley

TB has bigger rng, a big gamble indeed!

You should buy Uncollected or normal crystals for safer openning

Buttehrs

I buy TB ones but that's cause I'm chasing 5/6* punisher still

MystG

Given my terrible luck with pulls I only open the Basic ones. That too in short batches because I don't wanna get disappointed by pulling less than 1k units from any 1mil batch.

HuskerCool

I opened 1,000 Uncollected Arena crystals yesterday, getting 20,850 units

DNA3000

I opened 1,000 Uncollected Arena crystals yesterday, getting 20,850 units

The statistical average would be 18750 if the drop rates now are consistent with their originally designed rates, which is substantially above average.

Also, small correction. I misread the OP as stating that the unit yield for arena crystals is lower as of March 2025, not March 2024. I do have enough data to look at that more accurately. Including the batch I opened after posting, which was actually a bit below average (1125 units), my calculated average for unit yield per million BC worth of arena crystals is, coincidentally, 1875. Which is precisely the statistical average, if the drop rates were what they always have been.

Keep in mind the fact I hit the bullseye is a coincidence: had I calculated this average before opening my most recent batch, it would have been 1937.5, slightly above average. Its simply not dramatically lower than the expected value.

As mentioned above, while this is 13 million BC worth of drop data, it is only 260 crystals. 260 crystals is not enough to prove the drop rates are unaltered. It is enough data to suggest they haven't been modified downward by a substantial amount.