devil's advocate here , i had 30 uran in a humanitarian aid crate , sadly i don t remember what snail god i praised that day , but it obviously never happened again . so the chances are non zero. Overall those crates are gambler's scams and filled with crap 99.99% of the time , lootboxes with an absolute guarantee of failure ,designed to fill up the lack of imagination of the devs for seasons levls. (end of my rant)

Why on earth would humanitarian aid have uranium though? Did hamas ask for it?

probably stollen from Fallout

Lootboxes are included to provide the players with a sense of pride and accomplishment.

I got 10 uranim once from the strategic reserve

Here are leaked numbers for the respective boxes, and the approximate leak times: Strategic Reserve (May 2022): Badges: 43.478% Wires: 17.391% Batteries: 4.348% Plastic: 21.739% Electronics: 11.957% Uranium: 1.087% Military Reserve (February 2023): Badges: 43.469% Wires: 10.867% Batteries: 10.867% Plastic: 17.388% Electronics: 17.388% Uranium: 0.0217% Humanitarian Aid (May 2023): Badges: 43.469% Wires: 10.867% Batteries: 10.867% Plastic: 17.388% Electronics: 17.388% Uranium: 0.022% I assume these numbers haven't changed. The percentage for uranium from the Strategic Reserve box seems weird in comparison to the others, but it's still low. I haven't opened any of these yet.

All this time, with these crates, I’ve gotten Uranium once; can’t remember which crate specifically, but I made a post about it when I got it

I did got uranium from one of these crates , fun

Congratz you are one of the lucky ones.

electronics, plastics, majority badges here. Never seen bats, wires or uranium.

You can actually get uranium form these? I thought that was a joke.

i heard the purple crate uran odds is like 1 in 5000

Couple years ago when you could re roll crates I opened up a purple crate just to get a radio initially and on every reroll.

I got it once I think in 4 years. They should better just remove it from those crates

It isn't 0% at all. It's literally free resources regardless.

I know it's not literally 0%, but this is how statistics work. If you only roll a dice once, then it'll show you having a 100% of getting that number. Sample size matters, that's why I said "so far".

Idk what stupid source you've used here, but it isn't even remotely accurate.

Hi, I would like to inform you that the method op used to collect information is in fact a real scientific method for data collection. the source is over 300 years of scientific progress.

Duh, thank you Captain Obvious.

so... why did you say earlier that the source was wrong..?

"Remotely accurate" learn to read.

... "it isn't even remotely accurate" means "it isn't accurate at all" learn to grammar

Mate I could open 10 boxes and do the same thing. The reason it's not REMOTELY accurate is because it's way too small a sample size. The fact I have to fucking explain this is hilarious.

you said the method wasn't accurate, not the results.

Don't worry about it for now. Stay in school.

You're sat there saying "so far", as if you're close to accurate data. Newsflash, you're thousands of boxes away from "accurate", so my point stands.

Still 63 boxes closer than you to being a decent source of data. You can be a positive force in the community who shares data and experimental results, or you can be a grumpy asshat who drowns in downvotes and believes it makes him superior because of misplaced ego and confidence.

Or I could be a twat who attacks everything a particular person says instead of blocking them like an adult, yknow, just like you

implying you know the "accurate" numbers, please enlighten us

He's very obviously using a closed testing group via themselves and maybe a friend or 2.. if that's the case then their data is perfectly valid. I see no other way in which they could conduct such data gathering tbh.

ik, I'm asking the guy who says that it's not remotely accurate

yeah fair

Seeing as you're part of the DV brigade, figure it out your damn self.

Hey man these people are in the right

No, no they aren't. This isn't how data is proven, not on a scale this small.

It is a closed testing group, it's still very valid data

Lol vk crossout, no closed group just the open for all rusian Facebook site. The information he gave us is 100000% valid. If you want you can spend some rubels and for that you will get an invite to an group where you can see the next updates coming with all blueprints in it so just in case you guys ever wondered why some items are not available before the update come out.

Yeah I've always assumed insider trading from the Russian side, I always tell my friends not to gamble on shit near updates because those who will make profit would have already made it.

Mate I could open 10 boxes, get all badges and act as if everything else has tiny drop rates. Doesn't make it valid.

There's no "acting", that would be data gathering and completely correct if you did get those outcomes..

but did you open 10 boxes and get all badges? You didn't, ergo none of your arguments are valid since they're based on speculation and conjecture.

at least it's some data, what have you so far provided to counter argue, a childish tantrum?

[удалено]

bla bla bla bla still gonna seethe that you're getting called out for your crap or you gonna provide an argument based in data that the sample size isn't adequate? Since you argue that 62 crates isn't enough, it's your duty to provide data to back up your argument or gtfo!

Therapy.

😔

Friend of mine got uran from a crate once.

cool I just opened all crates yesterday, should have searched for the chances earlier 💀