All users will need to merge their Diablofans account with a new or existing Twitch account starting Nov 20th. You can merge your accounts by clicking here. Have questions? Learn more here.

you have 17k+ int which makes your all res quite high and the toughness you get from all res gets very high diminishing returns. so 90 int more adds 9 all res, +210 lightning res, 5 vitality. vs 7% ranged attack reduction which probably you have none on the rest of the gear to get diminishing returns. sounds about right imo.

so yeah, that 7% ranged damage reduction beats those other stats, just because you have really high all res and adding some more to it doesnt really give you that much.

It's the same when rolling +20% Elemental dmg, or more INT. Once you are into the 15K-16K range, the elemental will always be better than add more INT/STR/DEX to your character....you get DR.

you have 17k+ int which makes your all res quite high and the toughness you get from all res gets very high diminishing returns. so 90 int more adds 9 all res, +210 lightning res, 5 vitality. vs 7% ranged attack reduction which probably you have none on the rest of the gear to get diminishing returns. sounds about right imo.

so yeah, that 7% ranged damage reduction beats those other stats, just because you have really high all res and adding some more to it doesnt really give you that much.

You're overall right in what you said. But please just stop saying anything about diminishing returns. This term is used so wrong in the diablo community that it hurts.

7% ranged dmg reduction flat out beats 210 single resists in regards to toughness values. Doesn't matter if you already got 5 billion resists or 99% ranged dmg reduction.
The stat is just more valueable. There are NO diminishing returns involved.

there are no diminishing returns in any toughness value in D3, and neither in CDR and RCR for example.

Where you get diminishing returns is in stacking items/skills/effects that increase your "damage increased by skills" category.

Even stacking elemental dmg on items is diminished with every item you equip.

you have 17k+ int which makes your all res quite high and the toughness you get from all res gets very high diminishing returns. so 90 int more adds 9 all res, +210 lightning res, 5 vitality. vs 7% ranged attack reduction which probably you have none on the rest of the gear to get diminishing returns. sounds about right imo.

so yeah, that 7% ranged damage reduction beats those other stats, just because you have really high all res and adding some more to it doesnt really give you that much.

You're overall right in what you said. But please just stop saying anything about diminishing returns. This term is used so wrong in the diablo community that it hurts.

7% ranged dmg reduction flat out beats 210 single resists in regards to toughness values. Doesn't matter if you already got 5 billion resists or 99% ranged dmg reduction.
The stat is just more valueable. There are NO diminishing returns involved.

there are no diminishing returns in any toughness value in D3, and neither in CDR and RCR for example.

Where you get diminishing returns is in stacking items/skills/effects that increase your "damage increased by skills" category.

Even stacking elemental dmg on items is diminished with every item you equip.

while every single resist point gives you the exact same value than the previous one, no matter how much you stack it.

2284 all res gives 86.71% dmg reduction. adding 250 more = 2524 gives 87.81% thats 1.1% difference for 250 all res.

0 all res adding 250 gives 41.34% damage reduction.

41.34%=/=1.1% so either accept you are wrong or explain what diminishing returns actually is. also try adding 20% cdr on your already 50% and tell me you get a final value of 70%. same goes for RCR.

TL;DR there are diminishing returns in this game, a whole lot of them.

First, I have to admit that my statement that you marked is kinda misleading. Of course the very first point of all resist gives more than stacking 1 point all resists on top of 2000. I shouldve phrased that differently. But probably most people that read this know that English is not my first language. So bear with me ^^

Regarding your first example for 250 more resists. You realize that 100% damage reduction = infinity dmg reduction (invinsible) ?

So by that point you should realize that 0->1% dmg reduction and 98->99% damage reduction is both 1% point but A WORLD of difference in actual dmg reduction value.

To proof my point for stats like dmg reduce (either from armor or all res), cdr or rcr the max target stat here is always 100%. That's why it is misleading in thinking there are diminishing returns. So every other %point you gain here is worth more than the one before. So it makes sense that you need more resists, cdr, etc to increase your overall %value (that's why it feels even awkward to need to proof this cus it's so logical in my opinion).

200 all res gives you aprox. 50% additional dmg reduction compared to 100 all res

400 all res gives you aprox. 50% additional dmg reduction compared to 200 all res

...

this is a linear increase in damage reduction. Meaning doubling up on your value means doubling up on your overall toughness!

While it's true that the same value of all resis is less dmg reduction the higher you go on that stat that's the natural behavior of stats that cap out on 100%

The graph in value is still linear and won't decrease the more you add. (which is the very definition of "diminishing returns")

Same with CDR. I like to take the example of using Explosive Blast on a Wizard (ignoring the fact that it costs AP for this matter):

If you stack your sheet CDR from 0% to 50% you cut the CD of that skill from 6 sec to 3 sec --> that's a damage increase of 100%

If you stack your sheet CDR from 50% to 75% you cut the CD of that skill from 3 sec to 1.5 sec --> that's a damage increase of 100%

The CDR values on gear/paragon/gems you need to obtain both those milestones is exactly the same. (same thing as with the previous example on toughness, doubling up on value means doubling up on damage in case of explosive blast)

Fun example:

If you stack your sheet CDR from 98% to 99% you cut the CD of that skill from 0.12 sec to 0.06 sec --> that's a damage increase of 100%

If you stack your sheet CDR from 99% to 100% you cut the CD of that skill from 0.06 sec to 0.00 sec --> that's a damage increase of Infinity

The last example would actually be impossible to reach even with billions, trillions and whatever how much CDR values you would stack on top of each other. That's just the way this works if 100% is max and therefore Infinity (damage that won't compute, invincible, etc)

Sorry for the long post but you asked for it, and just want to help. No offense.

i'm not trying to start a forum fight here since i think they are pointless, and i actually read through all that post. also, my math isnt all that great and i would fail at trying to calculate crap with percentages like those you posted. but in my mind right now i still think its diminishing returns:

The law of diminishing returns states that in all productive processes, adding more of one factor of production, while holding all others constant, will at some point yield lower incremental per-unit returns.

would you still disagree with me based on this wikipedia definition? english is not my native language either so i might be confusing some terms.

and from in-game toughness sheet, taking previous example of

2284 all resist giving 86.71% damage reduction

versus approximately half the value

1141 giving 76.53% damage reduction.

isnt that diminishing returns, i dont think thats linear, added 100% more all res and ended up with what? something like 13-14% increase in value.

or the other example, 250 all res giving 41.34% versus 1141 which is 76.53%. almost 5 times more and added only like 85% increase in value.

isnt that the whole idea behind diminishing returns? the more you stack, the less you gain in incremental value. posting all these information just so we both come into the same conclusion and actually find whats the correct answer.

would you still disagree with me based on this wikipedia definition? english is not my native language either so i might be confusing some terms.

and from in-game toughness sheet, taking previous example of

2284 all resist giving 86.71% damage reduction

versus approximately half the value

1141 giving 76.53% damage reduction.

isnt that diminishing returns, i dont think thats linear, added 100% more all res and ended up with what? something like 13-14% increase in value.

I don't want to start a forum fight as well, dude.

Maybe I misinerpret the definition of diminishing returns as well. At least that's why I'm not that confident anymore after you posted that wikipedia definition. I already stated that the actual value you get from 1 point of all resists ( that's the 1 unit from that wikipedia definition ) is different if you go from 0 to 1 all resist or from 2000 to 2001 all resists.

However my statement remains the same that the graph is actually linear and you won't get actual less effective value out of stacking those stats. In regards to damage reduction I always try to explain how this works in observing it not growing closer to the 100% in damage reduction but reverse your point of view in what's the actual dmg you will receive afterwards.

While at 70% dmg reduction your incoming dmg will be 30% and while at 90% dmg reduction your incoming dmg will be 10%. 3 times less dmg! for gaining only 20 percent points. While getting from 0% to 50% your incoming dmg will only be reduced from 100% to 50% despite the fact that you gained 50 percent points. Only 2 times less dmg. (half dmg)

With this kept in mind you realize that the relative value for each percent point drawing closer to the 100% has more value than the previous one and that's why increasing your percent point value takes more and more overall all resist points the more you stack it (same as for armor, cdr and rcr). It still being a linear dmg mitigation tool if you understand the mechanics.

Your examples therefore make sense (note that in the first example the effective dmg reduction won't be a flat 50% since dmg reduction in d3 will be calculated together with armor and other stuff previously mentioned):

250 all res giving 41.34% --> 59.66% incoming dmg
1141 which is 76.53% --> 23.47% incoming dmg
effective damage reduction: 60.07% less incoming dmg ( [59.66 - 23.47] / 59.66 * 100 )

So right now after some research (while I wrote this post) I've come to the conclusion that neither Armor nor All Resists have diminishing returns on their own from the very definition standpoint of the term. However since they work together in conjunction to determine your overall dmg reduction they obviously have an influence on each other. I think almost everyone knows already about that optimal 1:10 ratio you want to strive for but is not very realistic to achieve for most classes.

So taking the Wiz again as example. The All Resist reduction will always be higher on that class than the Armor reduction. Meaning that if you stack All Resists on the Wiz it will suffer from diminishing returns (hence only 43.37% in the first example instead of 50%; it would be a flat 50% if All Resist would be the only dmg mitigation tool in d3)

So increasing the value of the higher of the both should be stated as "diminishing returns" and increasing the value of the lower of the both should be stated as "increasing returns" or maybe more fitting "complimenting returns". Again I've searched the web if there is a opposite of diminishing returns and haven't found one. So again it would be helpful to be a native speaker here

Sorry for the really long wall of text again. But overall I'm glad that I've digged into it again with a bit more effort than previously to understand why this misconception of diminishing returns exists in the first place.

If you hover over an item in your stash, you see an comparison with current equipped item, we all know that.

What i don't get is why is an item (Primal) worse than a ancient item?

Screen-shot:https://i.imgur.com/EgRDNeY.jpg

All stats are better, still the toughness is worse,

Can somebody explain?

The secondary ranged attack reduction

really? :-)

that 7% ranged DMG reduction beats:

Thanks for clearing that up for me.

you have 17k+ int which makes your all res quite high and the toughness you get from all res gets very high diminishing returns. so 90 int more adds 9 all res, +210 lightning res, 5 vitality. vs 7% ranged attack reduction which probably you have none on the rest of the gear to get diminishing returns. sounds about right imo.

so yeah, that 7% ranged damage reduction beats those other stats, just because you have really high all res and adding some more to it doesnt really give you that much.

It's the same when rolling +20% Elemental dmg, or more INT. Once you are into the 15K-16K range, the elemental will always be better than add more INT/STR/DEX to your character....you get DR.

You're overall right in what you said. But please just stop saying anything about diminishing returns. This term is used so wrong in the diablo community that it hurts.

7% ranged dmg reduction flat out beats 210 single resists in regards to toughness values. Doesn't matter if you already got 5 billion resists or 99% ranged dmg reduction.

The stat is just more valueable. There are NO diminishing returns involved.

there are no diminishing returns in any toughness value in D3, and neither in CDR and RCR for example.

Where you get diminishing returns is in stacking items/skills/effects that increase your "damage increased by skills" category.

Even stacking elemental dmg on items is diminished with every item you equip.

1st elemental item gives you 20% increased dmg (120 / 100 = 1,2 multiplier)

2nd elemental item gives you 16,7% increased dmg (140 / 120 = 1,167 multiplier)

while every single resist point gives you the exact same value than the previous one, no matter how much you stack it.

0 all res adding 250 gives 41.34% damage reduction.

41.34%=/=1.1% so either accept you are wrong or explain what diminishing returns actually is. also try adding 20% cdr on your already 50% and tell me you get a final value of 70%. same goes for RCR.

TL;DR there are diminishing returns in this game, a whole lot of them.

First, I have to admit that my statement that you marked is kinda misleading. Of course the very first point of all resist gives more than stacking 1 point all resists on top of 2000. I shouldve phrased that differently. But probably most people that read this know that English is not my first language. So bear with me ^^

Regarding your first example for 250 more resists. You realize that 100% damage reduction = infinity dmg reduction (invinsible) ?

So by that point you should realize that 0->1% dmg reduction and 98->99% damage reduction is both 1% point but A WORLD of difference in actual dmg reduction value.

To proof my point for stats like dmg reduce (either from armor or all res), cdr or rcr the max target stat here is always 100%. That's why it is misleading in thinking there are diminishing returns. So every other %point you gain here is worth more than the one before. So it makes sense that you need more resists, cdr, etc to increase your overall %value (that's why it feels even awkward to need to proof this cus it's so logical in my opinion).

200 all res gives you aprox. 50% additional dmg reduction compared to 100 all res

400 all res gives you aprox. 50% additional dmg reduction compared to 200 all res

...

this is a linear increase in damage reduction. Meaning doubling up on your value means doubling up on your overall toughness!

While it's true that the same value of all resis is less dmg reduction the higher you go on that stat that's the natural behavior of stats that cap out on 100%

The graph in value is still linear and won't decrease the more you add. (which is the very definition of "diminishing returns")

Same with CDR. I like to take the example of using Explosive Blast on a Wizard (ignoring the fact that it costs AP for this matter):

If you stack your sheet CDR from 0% to 50% you cut the CD of that skill from 6 sec to 3 sec --> that's a damage increase of 100%

If you stack your sheet CDR from 50% to 75% you cut the CD of that skill from 3 sec to 1.5 sec --> that's a damage increase of 100%

The CDR values on gear/paragon/gems you need to obtain both those milestones is exactly the same. (same thing as with the previous example on toughness, doubling up on value means doubling up on damage in case of explosive blast)

Fun example:

If you stack your sheet CDR from 98% to 99% you cut the CD of that skill from 0.12 sec to 0.06 sec --> that's a damage increase of 100%

If you stack your sheet CDR from 99% to 100% you cut the CD of that skill from 0.06 sec to 0.00 sec --> that's a damage increase of Infinity

The last example would actually be impossible to reach even with billions, trillions and whatever how much CDR values you would stack on top of each other. That's just the way this works if 100% is max and therefore Infinity (damage that won't compute, invincible, etc)

Sorry for the long post but you asked for it, and just want to help. No offense.

i'm not trying to start a forum fight here since i think they are pointless, and i actually read through all that post. also, my math isnt all that great and i would fail at trying to calculate crap with percentages like those you posted. but in my mind right now i still think its diminishing returns:

The law of diminishing returns states that in all productive processes, adding more of one factor of production, while holding all others constant, will at some point yield lower incremental per-unit returns.

would you still disagree with me based on this wikipedia definition? english is not my native language either so i might be confusing some terms.

and from in-game toughness sheet, taking previous example of

2284 all resist giving 86.71% damage reduction

versus approximately half the value

1141 giving 76.53% damage reduction.

isnt that diminishing returns, i dont think thats linear, added 100% more all res and ended up with what? something like 13-14% increase in value.

or the other example, 250 all res giving 41.34% versus 1141 which is 76.53%. almost 5 times more and added only like 85% increase in value.

isnt that the whole idea behind diminishing returns? the more you stack, the less you gain in incremental value. posting all these information just so we both come into the same conclusion and actually find whats the correct answer.

I don't want to start a forum fight as well, dude.

Maybe I misinerpret the definition of diminishing returns as well. At least that's why I'm not that confident anymore after you posted that wikipedia definition. I already stated that the actual value you get from 1 point of all resists ( that's the 1 unit from that wikipedia definition ) is different if you go from 0 to 1 all resist or from 2000 to 2001 all resists.

However my statement remains the same that the graph is actually linear and you won't get actual less effective value out of stacking those stats. In regards to damage reduction I always try to explain how this works in observing it not growing closer to the 100% in damage reduction but reverse your point of view in what's the actual dmg you will receive afterwards.

While at 70% dmg reduction your incoming dmg will be 30% and while at 90% dmg reduction your incoming dmg will be 10%. 3 times less dmg! for gaining only 20 percent points. While getting from 0% to 50% your incoming dmg will only be reduced from 100% to 50% despite the fact that you gained 50 percent points. Only 2 times less dmg. (half dmg)

With this kept in mind you realize that the relative value for each percent point drawing closer to the 100% has more value than the previous one and that's why increasing your percent point value takes more and more overall all resist points the more you stack it (same as for armor, cdr and rcr). It still being a linear dmg mitigation tool if you understand the mechanics.

Your examples therefore make sense (note that in the first example the effective dmg reduction won't be a flat 50% since dmg reduction in d3 will be calculated together with armor and other stuff previously mentioned):

2284 all resist giving 86.71% damage reduction --> 13.29% incoming dmg

1141 giving 76.53% damage reduction --> 23.47% incoming dmg

effective damage reduction: 43,37% less incoming dmg ( [23.47 - 13.29] / 23.47 * 100 )

250 all res giving 41.34% --> 59.66% incoming dmg

1141 which is 76.53% --> 23.47% incoming dmg

effective damage reduction: 60.07% less incoming dmg ( [59.66 - 23.47] / 59.66 * 100 )

So right now after some research (while I wrote this post) I've come to the conclusion that neither Armor nor All Resists have diminishing returns on their own from the very definition standpoint of the term. However since they work together in conjunction to determine your overall dmg reduction they obviously have an influence on each other. I think almost everyone knows already about that optimal 1:10 ratio you want to strive for but is not very realistic to achieve for most classes.

So taking the Wiz again as example. The All Resist reduction will always be higher on that class than the Armor reduction. Meaning that if you stack All Resists on the Wiz it will suffer from diminishing returns (hence only 43.37% in the first example instead of 50%; it would be a flat 50% if All Resist would be the only dmg mitigation tool in d3)

So increasing the value of the higher of the both should be stated as "diminishing returns" and increasing the value of the lower of the both should be stated as "increasing returns" or maybe more fitting "complimenting returns". Again I've searched the web if there is a opposite of diminishing returns and haven't found one. So again it would be helpful to be a native speaker here

Sorry for the really long wall of text again. But overall I'm glad that I've digged into it again with a bit more effort than previously to understand why this misconception of diminishing returns exists in the first place.