Talk:Treasure Hunter

Treasure Hunter Track
We need to figure out which chests are considered "high-end" - starting a list:

Prophecies Chests Factions Chests Nightfall Chests

Can someone confirm that the Dungeon end chests in Eye of the North do count for Treasure Hunter? I opened up a Chest of Wintersday Past today, and was surprised to notice no progress, since I was pretty sure all Dungeon Chests were 'High-End' Perhaps only this chest is not due to the easily farmable nature of the dungeon? RavenValcone 02:28, 17 September 2007 (CDT)

I'd guess that From darkstone down would be high end, at least. Possibly from Elonian down, but I'l like confirmation. If no one else wants to do this, I will, eventually. --Rainith 00:13, 27 April 2006 (CDT)
 * Edit - just checked Elonian are not high end. --Rainith 00:52, 27 April 2006 (CDT)
 * added Kurzick, I'm up to 3 / 90... Alxa 16:25, 2 May 2006 (CDT)
 * Theory: if henchies are lv20, then high end. If henchies aren't good enough for a place, then high end. d-: -PanSola 17:08, 2 May 2006 (CDT)
 * No go, henches are lvl 20 for the Canthan Chests, but those are not high end. --Rainith 17:26, 2 May 2006 (CDT)
 * Modified theory: if henchies are NOT lv20, then definitely NOT highend. d-: -PanSola 18:01, 2 May 2006 (CDT)

I think the theory is clear: If key is 600 gold or more, then it's chest is high-end. Why tie it with henchies? The key is a very clear indicator. --Karlos 02:45, 6 May 2006 (CDT)


 * I've been doing some math for the titles to see how much platinum I would actually have to spend to get the highest level. For this title, if you don't get any key drops, would be 1,500k ((2500*600g)/1000). O.O --Gares Redstorm 09:08, 19 May 2006 (CDT)


 * Remember that each chest drops an item you can merchant for about 200, which is 1/3 of the sum, that is, 500k you get back from drops. without even counting on good drops. Foo 04:14, 20 May 2006 (CDT)


 * You could always try farming the chests in Hell's Precipice, I've gotten 2 Sup Vigor runes in 1 run there, the keys definately are more expensive than shiverpeak ones, but that run netted me a good chunk of change. --Rainith 04:16, 20 May 2006 (CDT)


 * Actually the chests in Hell's take darkstone keys, which are the same price as shiverpeak keys. The issue is that the speed and frequency of chests in Hell's is much lower than in Witmans Folly, for instance. --MrJerrypants


 * Yeah, I did another calculation regarding selling back the items you receive, for control, just at merchant prices. Say the average is around 275g, as I have seen a range of around 200g-450g(with 450g items being more rare). The cost then would be, give or take, around 812.5k. This does not take into account if you can actually sell the items you recieve to other players for much more. However, its seems to be getting harder and harder to sell mods these days as everyone is looking to buy an already modded green item. I, myself, think the best weapons in the game are those you mod yourself to fit your style of play and skillset, but thats me. --Gares Redstorm 07:54, 22 May 2006 (CDT)


 * Updated math: If you get keys from the exclusive area, then you get them for 480 gold, on avergae the item you sell back will be worth 280 gold (150-200 purple, 250-400 gold). Excluding super finds that sell for over 5k, this means you need 200 gold per chest, which is 200x2500 = 500,000 gold. --Karlos 16:34, 10 June 2006 (CDT)

On [| Guru] someone mentioned something I'd like to see verifies: When opening an elonian chest that drops a gold Item this counts towards the Treasure Hunter title. That's probably not the easiest way to gain that title, but I think if this is true it should be mentioned here. --Chi Li 05:32, 13 June 2006 (CDT)


 * I'm willing to bet that guy mixed up Treasure Hunter and Wisdom title. --[[Image:TurningL sml.gif|Tetris L]] 06:15, 13 June 2006 (CDT)


 * After spending 2,7k and some time the conclusion is: Elonian golden chests do NOT count for the title. The gold item ofcourse counts for the wisdom track, so he must have gotten mixed up. --[[Image:Gem-icon-sm.png]] 15:25, 13 June 2006 (CDT)

I believe that any hard mode chest, regardless of location, gives a point for this title. If someone cares to check this, I'd be glad. Smarty100044@msn.com 15:46, 20 April 2007 (CDT)
 * I opened a Locked chest in Ascalon and it counted towards the title. -Spot 14:09, 26 April 2007 (CDT)

I was Under the impression that any chest that contained a gold was considered high end. 12:40, 08 October 2007

Hehe, i was thinking what chests was "high end". thank you, now i gonna buy some keys and get started =D --I Wanna Be A Rockstar 08:30, 20 July 2008 (UTC) Oh, i forgott, any1 knows where its easyest to find High End cheasts in the MORTAL realm, and where the keys are cheapest in high end areas!? --I Wanna Be A Rockstar 08:34, 20 July 2008 (UTC)
 * The cheapest high-end area keys are 600g (480g if you are in an alliance that owns a town in Factions). I don't know anything about chest run locations though. [[Image:Felix_Omni_Signature.png]] 08:38, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

Treasure hunter
It was earlier marked as 5000 max level, but now was changed to 10 000 max level. This goes well with the wisdom title, but I just want to ask if this is confirmed. -- 03:27, 19 June 2006 (CDT)


 * And it leads to another question: Why did Tarutaru report that 5000 counted towards kind of a big deal and are max??? Is his information true and Anet changed the maximum or did he pimp his stats? -- Kai Neah Nung somewhen

Hunter or Hunting

 * Note: The content of this talk section has been moved here from Talk:Title --[[Image:TurningL sml.gif|Tetris L]] 05:14, 16 November 2006 (CST)

Should it be treasure hunter or treasure hunting track? This is where english gets weird. So im looking for advice. In my head it should be Treasure Hunter Track.... which is why my link didn't work :] --Woonack 09:00, 21 August 2006 (CDT); Just noticed its also got Skill Hunter, not skill hunting.

The Treasure Hunter and Seeker of Wisdom titles

 * Note: The content of this talk section has been moved here from Talk:Title --[[Image:TurningL sml.gif|Tetris L]] 05:29, 16 November 2006 (CST)

If I understand the October 25th update correctly, the way it is worded, salvaging items have a base 50% chance success rate with a 3% increase x (your rank in "Treasure Hunter" + "Seeker of Wisdom"). So if I have Advanced Trasure Hunter (3) and Collector of Wisdom (2). That's 3% times 5 or a 15% added to the base 50%. So that would mean a total 65% success rate of salvaging. Correct? --DaveBaggins 01:34, Oct 26 2006 (CST)


 * Looks like it, but they changed it, when they FIRST put that on the site, it was a 75% chance to salvage without destroying. And +1% per rank in those titles. It was much better that way because it didnt give people with both those titles a huge advantage. Now I kinda agree with those who were mad about the reward, if it was something small like their site FIRST said, then it wouldnt bother me, but now only a 50% chance(base) with +3% per rank? thats crazy. People with both maxed have a 92% chance to salvage without breaking the wep, way more unbalanced going from 50% up to 92%, as opposed to a 75% base and going up to a 99% base. --Mwpeck 10:53, 26 October 2006 (CDT)


 * Yeah, it's disappointing, but it probably won't have a huge impact, since most gold items only either only one valuable mod or all cheap / unpopular / common / non-max mods. -- Gordon Ecker 18:45, 26 October 2006 (CDT)
 * I do wish they'd make both of these account-based titles, not character-based. They really should have done that when they become functional in addition to cosmetic. Bugs me all the time, seems a bit unfair to newer/less intense players. ANet isn't usually unnecessarily stingy like that. Ah well. And yeah, I know I'm risking looking the gift horse in the mouth, considering that the salvage changes were nice and generous. =) — HarshLanguage [[Image:qswearing_small.png|HarshLanguage]] 03:12, 31 December 2006 (CST)


 * Good Idea, HarshLaguage! I agree. Maybe its easiest to get this title with a Warrior, and the Title would look more interesting if its seen at another clas, sbut all in all, it would be better to make this PvE Title Account based. And the Wisdom Title would DEFINITLY be better if character-based, because the weapons can be put to the storage and identified with the character who should get this title! And you won't have a advantage if youve got a char that can salvage lucky for 44%, and another one for 38%. I always change my char if i want to salvage an item, and this is absurd, isn't it? -- Zerpha The Improver 09:24, 5 February 2007 (CST)


 * Wisdom and Treasure Hunter should both be account based (or you should be allowed to change your primary profession). With the titles character based, Guild Wars is biasing the game towards players who only play one main character (many players like to play multiple characters equally).  All character based titles to this, but these are the only functional ones.  Yes the function of this title is just a bonus to how the game was before the title, but making it character based does promote the following negative outcomes:
 * Treasure Hunter being character based obviously promotes: you using only one character/class to open chests, which encourages less build/location changes and more tedious farming; encouraging other characters on your account not to open chests as they run into them naturally playing the game (which if anything should be more encouraged).
 * Wisdom being character based encourages you to shuffle inventory through storage and switch characters whenever you want to identify a gold. This can prove to be very tedious and annoying, even with the recent character select option when logging out.  Larger storage and the ability to move multiple items at a time would help, but it would still be unnecessarily tedious.
 * Both Titles being character based encourages you to move anything you want to salvage into another account to get more materials out of the salvaging. This creates additional interuption while playing the game.  --Mooseyfate 11:38, 24 February 2007 (CST)


 * all i see is whining with no good reason as to why the titles should be account based. personally, i think lucky shouldn't even be account based, but at least that one makes a little sense as to why it is.


 * You make a good point. Right now I have a character for treasure hunting and another for identifying golds.  The reason being that the wisdom seeker had already started identifying golds but is not in a high-end area to hunt treasure yet while the other has gotten much further.  He could start IDing, but that wastes any previous IDs made by the other.  I'm constantly dropping off my golds in storage.  He farms, goes to storage, I log him out and her in, she goes to storage, IDs, scraps parts that could be useful, makes a trip to the merchant, goes back to storage to drop off the money, log out/in, he gets the money and buys more keys and it all starts over again.  If it was account based it would save alot of time and trouble...but then...I guess the reason of a title is the challenge and effort put forth in gaining it.  StarrTheInsane 20:54, 22 March 2007 (CDT)

Pre searing???
K yea so i jsut saw someone in pre with this title... where the hell are there high end chests in pre?-- Thelordofblah 22:36, 8 April 2007 (CDT)
 * Someone must have farmed a lot of Golden Eggs this weekend. &mdash; [[Image:Fin_sig.gif|User:Kyrasantae]] kyrasantae   23:37, 8 April 2007 (CDT)
 * OOOH I get it now... yea that must have taken a while.-- Thelordofblah 23:52, 9 April 2007 (CDT)
 * Huh ? Eggs = Sweeth tooth title.. not the Treasure Hunter title... *Im confused* --Benoit flageol 18:10, 10 April 2007 (CDT)
 * When you 1st pick up an egg you get 1 treasure point. --JP 18:13, 10 April 2007 (CDT)
 * It was just a client hack. Presearing is not closed anymore. --213.140.6.120 13:45, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

IT WAS NO CLIENT HACK :D people just farmed a lot of Golden Eggs during the easter weekend last year... those eggs give 1 point to treasure hunter if you pick one up (only gives you one point per egg, you can't drop it and gain more points) and to sweet tooth if consumed. 84.195.131.227 07:54, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
 * It would be impossible to farm 10000 eggs in a weekend, you can only farm probably about 50 eggs an hour in post searing at best, so I doubt you can farm even a fraction of that in pre searing since there isn't big mobs that you can farm within a minute or so... enemies are more scattered out in presearing. It would take longer than a weekend to farm that many. I am guessing that someone was using an exploit to get to presearing.  Could of been someone that works for GW also. (64.89.254.156 16:09, 17 June 2008 (UTC))
 * He never said the person had the max treasure hunter title. Cress Arvein [[Image:Cress sig.JPG]] 16:13, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

Picked up, not asigned.
Picking up a golden egg will give you bonus to title. I picked up an egg that wasn't asigned for me (original owner did not wanted it) and my treasure hunter title got +1 bonus. 83.5.134.84 18:44, 9 April 2007 (CDT)

Just a quick question, does the title have to be displayed to get the benefit, or is it passive?
 * It's a passive effect.--Sykoone 18:38, 10 April 2007 (CDT)

Tip
I'm not sure if this is important enough to be put on the main page, but if you are a member of an alliance that owns a town, buying keys and lockpicks from the discount merchant can lower the "minimum" cost for the max title to 4800 plats (assuming one used all faction keys, but even lockpicks are much cheaper that way). Reason.decrystallized 10:11, 28 June 2007 (CDT)

Hard mode chests vs normal mode
the page states that the lock pick bonus increases the chance from a 10% base, however, you have a higher chance to retain a lock pick when using them on non-hard mode chests...
 * I updated the text to reflect different base %'s --  Glamtre  [[Image:Axe-icon-right.png]] (Contribs) 17:15, 10 August 2007 (CDT)

Locked chests=treasure hunter?
I was wondering, i know you get treasure hunter points for each high end (where the key costs 600g+) chest you open, and i know that if you use a lockpick on theses chests in NM you get the points, so what i can't understand is, why doesn't a locked chest give points towards it? even in the harder areas (e.g elite missions, FoW UW etc.) where the chests would get you points in NM? (sorry if that's a bit unclear =P)PheNaxKian 07:12, 14 August 2007 (CDT)
 * Opening a high-end chest with a key gives treasure hunter. Opening it with a lock pick gives treasure hunter as well as the lucky/unlucky title. The points remain the same no matter which type of chests you open --Blue.rellik 07:26, 14 August 2007 (CDT)
 * K i guess i didn't explain clearly-i understand all that what i means is when you open a [b]Locked chest[/b] you don't get any points towards the title, regardless of where your opening the chest at (including elite missions and the realm of the gods) which to me seems stupid, because a high end chest is classed as a chest where the key costs 600g or more from a normal merch. so I don't understand why locked chests don't count towards it. (think that's a bit clearer.....)PheNaxKian 11:58, 19 August 2007 (CDT)
 * Locked Chests do count towards the title. Sadie2k 23:36, 26 September 2007 (CDT)

Lockpick equation
I was bored in precalc today, so I figured out the equation for equation to determine the MPC(Maximum Probability Cost) of gaining each tier of the track with lockpicks. It WILL cost less then this usually. This number is assuming that you don't have horrible luck and don't have insanely good luck. Each lockpick that is saved is instantly destroyed on the next chest by this equation.

1500((E-S)-(E-S)((B+T)/100))) Whereas E= Total # of chests that need to be opened. S= # of chests already opened. B= The Base chest save % depending on what chest your opening. T= Save % from titles. This equation can be edited to account for discount lockpicks by changing 1500 to 1250. On 10% base chance chests, it costs 11232k if you have worse then most luck, much more expensive then regular keys but this number is higher then what will probably happen. The actual average number is incredibly hard to caculate, and someone else will have to modify the equation.--ìğá†ħŕášħ  Talk^Cont 02:54, 24 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Here is a table of the approximate number of lockpicks you need for each level for base 10% (and base 30%). Each equation is (# until next level) * (100 - %chance).


 * 100 * 0.90 = 90 (70)
 * 150 * 0.87 = 131 (101)
 * 300 * 0.84 = 252 (192)
 * 650 * 0.81 = 527 (397)
 * 1300 * 0.78 = 1014 (754)
 * 2500 * 0.75 = 1875 (1375)
 * 5000 * 0.72 = 3600 (2600)


 * So for 10% base, you need about 7489 lockpicks, and for 30% base (600g-key level), you need about 5489. This costs 11223k and 8233k respectively, or 8987k and 6587k at discount price.  Regular keys would cost 6000k (10k keys @ 600g ea) or 4800k at discount price.  This means it is a minimum of about 1786k cheaper to use keys over lockpicks.


 * In addition, if you need a minimum of 5489 lockpicks to get the maxed title, that assumes that 5489 times, the lockpick breaks, and (@ 10000 - 5489) 4511 times, the lockpick is retained. This will give you 1,127,750 lucky points and 137,225 unlucky points.  According to the Luck titles guide, it costs less than 1786k to get the same amount of points playing the festival games.  This means using discount keys and discount lockpicks (on 30% base chests) gives a slightly better result for cost; however, at non-discount prices, the gap between the key cost and the lockpick cost (30% base) widens to 2,223k (or up to 5,223k with 10% base chests), in which case it would be significantly cheaper to use regular keys and play games for the un/lucky titles (ignoring the festival game time-requirement).


 * None of this takes into account selling the items you get from the chest, although I assume that the drops from a regular 600g key and the drops from a 30% base are the same (they would be the same chests). Let me know if I missed anything or messed up the math somewhere (you'd get an eventual extra 2-4% retain rate from the lucky title if you were using all lockpicks for one thing, but I'm not sure that's enough to counter the price difference). :D
 * -- Peej 18:48, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
 * The big problem with this is that you can't realistically account for the lucky title. With that many lucky points (1,127,750) you'd be getting +10% retain, which drastically changes the final tiers. Not only that, but the increased retain rate increases the chance of lucky points, so that estimate of lucky points is actually pessimistic. Another problem (for working these things out) is loot, while it is fair to assume that 30% base and 600g key chests give the same loot (being the same chests) retained lockpicks give a second drop, and the bigger issue with loot is Hard Mode. A single Elite Tome can be worth almost 20k, even a normal tome would be worth 1k. On the 10% chests lockpicks are already more cost effective than keys, in EotN or HM, keys aren't even an option. Anyway, loot is an even worse variable than lucky points, when you want an accurate estimate. 13:07, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

This formula is incomplete. It does not take into account the fact that a retained lockpick can be retained a second, third, etc. time. The actual formula must contain a series which takes this into acount. This changes the picture in favor of the lockpicks at the last 2 stages of the title because of the high chance for retainig. Taking into acount that the last stages of the title acount for 75% of the chests you need to open it is considerably cheeper to open 600 gp chests on NM with lockpicks in order to gain this title. I will illustrate this with an example let's say you have 100 lockpicks and 50% chance to retain. Than you'll retain 50 (total 150 opened cheste) of the lockpicks on avarage. Of these 50 lockpicks you will retain 25 on avarage (totla 175 opened chests). Of the 25 remaining lockpicks you'll retain 12 (187 chests) and so on. Taking the limit of this series we see that you'll open 200 chests on avarage in this situation, not 150.

could anybody help me how to get title??
I've been thinking to going for this title and was wondering what is currently the best way achieving it(assuming I got discounted lockpicks) those are the ways I know: 1)open chest in Witman's Folly(useing lockpicks in NM). 2)open chest in Witman's Folly(useing lockpicks in HM). 3 and 4)open chest in Morostav Trail when luxon control the area(I'm kurzick)(useing lockpicks in HM or NM). I wanna know the cheapest way for getting the title. don't need good drops...Ts healer 13:18, 25 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Option 1 won't work, 2 is expensive, 3 is blank, but 4 should work (NM), even though it doesn't matter who controls the area. 4 in HM is the same as option 2. Cress Arvein(Talk) 15:01, 25 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Why won't option 1 work, they are Shiverpeak Chests, so qualify as high end. 82.16.137.96 04:11, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
 * If all you want is treasure hunter, then shiverpeak keys with shiverpeak chests, Kurzick, Luxon or Vabbi chests are equally good (necessarily normal mode). If money is not an issue then a better option is lockpicks which will give you a base 40% retain rate on those chests as well as progress towards the lucky and unlucky titles. If you additionally want good drops or to progress the wisdom title then HM locked chests have a better chance of good loot (drops are dependent on the area of the chest so choose one with an item you want, if you intend to open a lot of locked chests then desolation could be good for a chance of elemental swords). Keep in mind that in HM you would have bounties available allowing you to progress even more titles while looking for chests. -Ezekiel 04:50, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
 * What are u gonna do w/ bounties when ur runnin around openin chests? Toxin 19:12, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
 * No-one said you were running. If you want the titles faster then yes, you could ignore mobs, however without the drops from the mobs inbetween chests your expenses will rise dramatically. If you are working on all titles at once (HM lockpicks) then I would recommend fighting your way through zones, if you're good enough at HM you can also vanquish and map the areas along the way, progressing another two titles as you go. Ezekiel  [Talk]  01:39, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Yeap, agree. Unless you have so much gold you don't mind losing a significant amount from buying picks and running chests then it's best to fight your way there. Typically you might expect bounties - advancing a title track or two, cartography track, vanquisher track, wisdom track (additional from killing foes because golds may drop) and treasure hunter track.. so that's what? advancing 5+ title tracks? Also, it's probably best to pick chests that drop inscriptibles (i.e EotN and NF) as your chance of making a profit increases dramatically. Just my two cents. --Call Me Rexy 02:40, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

Cathedral of Flames (lvl 1) Chest Running.
I have noticed that chest running the first level of Cathedral of Flames in NM is really good for Treasure Hunter title. You can get 1-2 chest a minute, and possibly leading to 30+ chest an hour depending on your luck of getting 2 chest a run or not... But most of the time there will be 2 chest. Running chest with inscribable items is also great for profit, leading to making alot of money back that was spent on lockpicks. NF and EotN are definately areas you want to chest run. If you want to have a good place to get more chest in a small amount of time, I recommend trying out Cathedral of Flames dungeon. Just make sure you got the "Temple of the Damned" quest and use it to go into the dungeon. I just recently reached lvl 5 Elite Treasure Hunter myself. But if I really wanted to work on title alone, I would go hardcore CoF. I maybe did around 200 chest from CoF since realizing its potential. If anyone has any other good chest running spots that can give 1-2 chest a minute, let me know... (ReZDoGG) --64.89.254.156 23:05, 15 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Doubt there's a spot where you can get more chests a minute. For now I combine several titles and thus run the Snowmen Lair (drunkard, sweet tooth, party animal, lucky and treasure hunter, wisdom... deldrimor would be another but I've maxed that already). It has 4-5 chests and a run takes 12 minutes in HM with a friend and heroes... I guess 14 minutes with heroes and henchies. --Birchwooda Treehug 21:11, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

I agree, CoF is a great location. See my guide posted on my blog http://gw-rangerelite.blogspot.com.

Calculation 1
If strictly using Lockpicks in normal mode of the Eye of the North expansion, it is possible to completely progress through all levels of the title with. The total cost of using 10,000 lockpicks is but when factoring the chance of retaining each Lockpick it equates to. This would be the cost of 10,000 high end chests in normal mode of Eye of the North, without making a profit from the items received. The prices can vary quite greatly but assuming the average price is then the total cost of achieving the maximum rank in this title is  &mdash;The preceding unsigned comment was added by 142.162.76.67 (contribs).
 * 350 is a rather optimistic amount, unless you are selling the components to other players. Besides, the total cost varies greatly because of the increasing lucky and treasure hunter bonuses, not to mention that lockpicks do not perfectly mirror the theoretical probabilities. We can be sure of 6 million for 600g keys and 4.8 million for discount keys (before loot). But there is no reliable way for predicting the cost of using lockpicks, besides saying that it starts at (discount lockpicks bought at a 50g markup) and becomes cheaper dependent on retention. Ezekiel   [Talk]  06:20, 3 January 2009 (UTC)
 * "lockpicks do not perfectly mirror the theoretical probabilities" Bah, conspiracy.  Nothing matches theory perfectly, but I kept track of my lockpicks on a string of 90 chests I opened to finally get rank 1 Lucky.  This was all NM EotN at r2 TH, so my theoretical RR was 46%.  For the first 70 chests my actual RR matched it pretty closely, then I got really unlucky and only retained on 6 of the last 20 chests, which took my RR down to 42.2%.  With a sampling of only 90 data points, that's still easily within the margin of error.  &mdash;Dr Ishmael [[Image:Diablo_the_chicken.gif]] 07:12, 3 January 2009 (UTC)
 * The main reason I think it's difficult is because you need to account for the raising retention as TH goes up (which is not hard to do), but also the raising retention from lucky, and then you're still left with an end result that's liable to swing at least 100k. If we allowed for accuracy to within 5% (2.5% either side) that's still a 635k range. I just don't think it's worth listing a number if it's so variable. If someone worked it out, taking in both the increasing TH and luck bonuses throughout, and if the result was something interesting (compared to the cost of 600g keys or something) then it might be worth putting on the page. Ezekiel  [Talk]  09:22, 3 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Well, I made some calculations, not including lucky title. this is with lockpicks only from 0 chests opened to rank 7 INCLUDING the bonus from the title. Remember, it's all on the average, and actual situations will fall around this value:
 * To rank 1: 100 chests, 50% chance: 50 lockpicks used. -> 62k 500g
 * To rank 2: 150 chests, 53% chance: 150-79.5 => 71 (rounded up) lockpicks used -> 88k 750g
 * To rank 3: 300 chests, 56% chance: 300-168 => 132 lockpicks used -> 165k 000g
 * To rank 4: 650 chests, 59% chance: 650-383.5 => 267 (rounded up) lockpicks used -> 333k 750g
 * To rank 5: 1300 chests, 62% chance: 1300-806 => 494 lockpicks used -> 617k 500g
 * To rank 6: 2500 chests, 65% chance: 2500-1625 => 875 lockpicks used -> 1 093k 750g
 * To rank 7: 5000 chests, 68% chance: 5000-3400 => 1600 lockpicks used -> 2 000k 000g
 * Total average cost: 4 361k 250g
 * I hope this helps a bit. I could include the lucky title, presuming you have no lucky points yet too, but it'd take much longer, and I'll only do that if thought to be neccessairy here.--[[Image:El Nazgir sig.png]]El_Nazgir 09:59, 3 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Nice work, where'd you get 50% retain from though? I thought base rate for high-end chests was 40%? Ezekiel  [Talk]  12:56, 3 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Yeah, adding an extra 10% initially would screw things up. And it would be nice if you expicitly stated which value of lockpicks you're using. (it seems like you're using 1.25k) --JonTheMon 15:14, 3 January 2009 (UTC)
 * whoops, i totally screwed up, didn't i? well, i'll do my calculations again wiht 1.5k and starting from 40%.--[[Image:El Nazgir sig.png]]El_Nazgir 15:37, 3 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Here are the new calculations, not including lucky and with lockpicks at 1k500 (normal merchant price):
 * To rank 1: 100 chests, 40% chance: 60 lockpicks used. ->
 * To rank 2: 150 chests, 43% chance: 150-64.5 => 86 (rounded up) lockpicks used ->
 * To rank 3: 300 chests, 46% chance: 300-138 => 162 lockpicks used ->
 * To rank 4: 650 chests, 49% chance: 650-318.5 => 332 (rounded up) lockpicks used ->
 * To rank 5: 1300 chests, 52% chance: 1300-676 => 624 lockpicks used ->
 * To rank 6: 2500 chests, 55% chance: 2500-1375 => 1125 lockpicks used ->
 * To rank 7: 5000 chests, 58% chance: 5000-2900 => 2100 lockpicks used ->
 * total:
 * I hope everything is correct this time >.< --[[Image:El Nazgir sig.png]]El_Nazgir 16:00, 3 January 2009 (UTC)

(Reset indent) *cough* &mdash;Dr Ishmael  17:45, 3 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Damn, if i'd have known it already existed, I wouldn't have went through all that trouble. Even with lucky included! Can't we put that in the mainspace (in a table or something)?--[[Image:El Nazgir sig.png]]El_Nazgir 18:27, 3 January 2009 (UTC)
 * The only problem is that the template can't quite calculate all 13 levels of both titles from 0 - if you look at the code for that page, I have the first four levels written out. This is due to a limitation in the wiki software to prevent overloading the server with millions of function calls.  We could copy the info into a table, sure - probably on Lockpick would be best.  &mdash;Dr Ishmael [[Image:Diablo_the_chicken.gif]] 19:17, 3 January 2009 (UTC)
 * /cheer! /congrats! I'd say that settles completely that lockpicks are substantially cheaper (by a good 400k saving) and then having the table is even more useful. <font color=#555>Ezekiel <font color=#AAA> [Talk]  01:06, 4 January 2009 (UTC)


 * TR0 LR0 100 chests to TR1, 40% retention, estimated 60 picks used 40 picks retained (10,000 luck points)
 * TR1 LR0 150 chests to TR2, 43% retention, estimated 85.5 picks used and 64.5 picks retained (+16,375 for 26,375 luck points)
 * TR2 LR0 205.4 chests to LR1, 46% retention, estimated 110.9 picks used and 94.5 picks retained (+23625 for 50,000 luck points)
 * TR2 LR1 94.6 chests to TR3, 48% retention, estimated 49.2 picks used and 45.4 picks retained (+11,352 for 61,352 luck points)
 * TR2 LR1 303.1 chest to LR2, 51% retention, estimated 148.5 picks used and 154.6 picks retained (+38,648 for 100,000 luck points)
 * TR3 LR2 346.9 chests till TR4, 53% retention, estimated 170 picks used and 183.9 picks retained (+34,725 for 134,725 luck points)
 * TR4 LR2 823.4 chests till LR3, 56% retention, estimated 362.3 picks used and 461.1 picks retained (+115,275 for 250,000 luck points)
 * TR4 LR3 476.6 chests till TR5, 58% retention, estimated 200.2 picks used and 276.4 picks retained (+69,107 for 319,107 luck points)
 * TR5 LR3 1186.2 chests till LR4, 61% retention, estimated 462.6 picks used and 723.572 picks retained (+180,893 for 500,000 luck points)
 * TR5 LR5 1313.8 chests till TR6, 63% retention, estimated 486.1 picks used and 827.7 picks retained (+206,925 for 706,925 luck points)
 * TR6 LR5 1776.2 chests till LR6, 66% retention, estimated 603.9 picks used and 1172.3 picks retained (+293,075 for 1,000,000 luck points)
 * TR6 LR6 3223.8 chests till TR7, 68% retention, estimated 1031.6 picks used and 2192.2 picks retained (+548,046 for 1,548,046 luck points)
 * TR7 achieved with a total of 3770.8 picks used and 6192.2

So the number on the main article page is correct (I rounded everything to tenths), but I didn't see the actual math anywhere here. By playing 9 rings to increase your lucky rate the cost will go up. With an estimated 200g value per chest drop (low estimate) maxing treasure hunter will cost you 2705k, which is about 1.5x the cost of Sugar or Party titles, and you're improving 4 titles at once (although wisdom goes really slow on 40% base chests), so it's not a bad deal. 68.180.77.16 07:38, 24 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Yeah, raising that many titles at once is a great thing. If you're interested in any of the maths for other combinations of ranks take a look at Dr Ishmael's Sandbox and try out his code. -<font color=#555>Ezekiel <font color=#AAA> [Talk]  02:50, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

Low-End + Lockpick
Okay, so will opening a low-end chest in normal mode with a lockpick count toward this title? I came here to find out, but see it listed...I can test it later if nobody else can test it first -- 71.157.132.174 20:04, 2 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Treasure Hunter title only increases when you open high-end chests, as stated in the introductory paragraph; the use of lockpicks only benefits the Lucky title. The idea behind using lockpicks on high-chests (or HM Locked Chests) is to both reduce the total time needed to increase both titles and (depending on other factors) the associated costs. (Apologies for the late answer.)  &mdash; Tennessee Ernie Ford ( TEF ) 18:27, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

Lockpick retention rate claimed by the game is wrong (The Game Cheats = TGC)
After it kept seeming that my lockpicks were breaking more often than what the game said they should, I kept careful track of how often my lockpick was retained for chests where the game claimed the retention rate was 71%. It is much less. I would like others to keep careful records, keeping track of claimed retention rates, number of lockpicks used and number retained and then fill in (adding new lines as needed), as below. If done properly, I will apply a statistical analysis (I am a statistician by training--and yes, I like it!) to provide values in the last three cells. A Confidence Interval (CI) is an interval that gives the range of plausible values for the retention rate, with some high probability (here, 95%). (FYI -- for those that care, and understand, all results are exact, not asymptotic.) We need fairly large numbers for lockpicks used, such as over a 100. GW-Susan 04:30, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

If the true retention rate was, indeed, 71%, then my getting only 427 retentions for 657 lockpicks used would happen in only about 1 in 1100 tries (of using 657 lockpicks). Not too likely (TGC)! I've always thought the random number generator used was not doing its job properly, not only for lockpicks, but other cases, like miss rates (such as being hit 4 times in a row when I've got a block rate of 75%, and having this happen over and over and over again).


 * If true, this wouldn't be the first game to have trouble programming true randomness. Often, the random number generators work fine, but there's a problem with resetting the seed condition and/or sometimes a memory registry isn't cleared properly, so the results aren't random. (The player experiences random results when they open the game, but over time, previous events influence succeeding rolls.) It's very hard to nail down the causes; for the few games in which I had details from developers, the causes were deeply imbedded in the game engine, so they weren't fixed until the sequel came out.


 * I suspect you have enough data available to make it worth reporting, as I believe the developers will have access to the data of the 1000s of ppls buying 3000+ picks to max their titles. You can create a support ticket via [mailto:support@guildwars.com email] OR the website. You can also post on the Official site's bug page, to which developers sometimes reply publicly. (ANet reads every ticket and post; they only respond to some.) -- I would like to see how things look at different retention rates; perhaps the error changes with the rates.  I was hoping after I got more cases (after all, I MIGHT really just be unlucky!) and then report the findings.  (By the way, I can't figure out how to get the bar separating the Number used cell from the Number kept cell--if anyone can fix it, please do so.) GW-Susan 19:31, 25 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Regardless of the cause and ANet's response, thanks for taking the time to collect data and analyze other ppl's data, too.  &mdash; Tennessee Ernie Ford ( TEF ) 19:08, 25 August 2009 (UTC)