Therefore, as a recommendation for actual possible MF values (Nagelring 50%, Topaz in helm 41%, Cain's set 50%), we can say that for 150 MF farming a Torment 3 rift,

Consider this.

1) Topaz means that you are losing out at minimum 5-15% DPS for 4.1% more legs (You'll lack either mainstat, 6% crit, 15% main-attack or resource regeneration).
2) Nagelring means you're also losing out 5-15% DPS for 5% more legs (You'll be missing out on CC, CD or mainstat)
3) Cains set means sacrificing some other 2-3 set piece that will most likely be worth more then 5%.

Now, since we know that raising torment gives you 15% more legendaries for 60% more enemy health, that means there's a 100:38~ ratio between magic find and damage, that is if you can get 100 MF and lose 38% of your DPS, then that is equivalent to playing on higher torment. However as I think most of us have noticed, playing on higher torment is not particularly efficient in legendaries per hour.

If losing 38% of your DPS means that you clear 10% or more slower, then the trade (or raising torment for that matter) was inefficient.

What happened to my last post? I am pretty sure it wasn't against the TOS or something. Let's try this again.

It's funny that when I followed the link from Reddit to here, the post on Reddit was up voted massively, and by the time I try to find it again it was already down voted to oblivion. Apparently, the guys on reddit did not even attempt to see what the difference between the "suggested" and "given" formulas are, and keep shouting that 1.17 != 1.15. (of course they didn't say that, if they knew that the difference is this small, they would have stopped down voting)

It is not just 1.17 != 1.15, it's that his formula is additive instead of multiplicative which means it massively fails to predict the drop rate at high T.

It just happens to fall close to reality at t1-t3 but fails at high T.

1+6*.17 = 2.02
1.15^6 = 2.31

So 102% bonus at t6 vs 131%. That is not a small error.

I've already spent way too much time on this to even debate all of these posts, but I feel like there are severe reading deficiencies abundant.

For every graph of my interpretation, I presented the standard 1.15^N graph right next to it as a comparison in case mine wasn't right. These are entirely correct.

We assume that the blue poster is indeed confirming the drop rate function so whimsically (probably one of the most well-kept critical pieces of information) and that there isn't additional components to it.

Even if I was/am wrong, why not have an extra piece of information? Mine related defined monster health percentages for varying torment difficulty, and time is the critical component in what makes it worth it to farm a certain difficulty level. Therefore if a monster health increases at a non-linear rate, why not fit a curve to assume Blizzard is interpreting on a basis of time to kill a monster. The resulting DPS to overcome that time to kill a monster was my foundation. But, hey, if we want to go with 1.15^N - that just makes everyone's life simpler. I will remove the left graph of all figures so nobody has to painstakingly look at it.

I assume legendary drop rates is 10% of your current MF. This was confirmed by a blue post I read awhile back and has been generally accepted. This means for 300% MF, you have 30% contributing to your legendaries. This is a 1.3x multiplier. I assume this is multiplied by the rift bonus factor of 1.25 (which can be seen as 250% MF), which is already multiplied by the torment difficulty increase factor.

This is merely a post to compare the legendary drop rate increase factor for rifting and MF. As stated in the post (and of course this is so obvious), don't sacrifice your DPS to an unbearable amount so it's like you're throwing rocks at normal mobs and they aren't falling over. Increasing torment levels makes it more difficult at a non-linear rate (i.e. torment 1 to 2 is easy, but torment 5 to 6 is not), so there should be a fixed value for your gear where you can handle a lower Torment level with MF and the question would be "what gain does this net me?" Say you choose the Torment level below what you can farm in your best, and you slap on 150 MF and you actually end up increasing the drop rate for the same amount of clear time. Simple as that. It comes to several factors, but we're only looking at flat drop rate increase factors here... taking everything into consideration (DPS, monster type, etc.) in varying environments is an overwhelming study.

What happened to my last post? I am pretty sure it wasn't against the TOS or something. Let's try this again.

It's funny that when I followed the link from Reddit to here, the post on Reddit was up voted massively, and by the time I try to find it again it was already down voted to oblivion. Apparently, the guys on reddit did not even attempt to see what the difference between the "suggested" and "given" formulas are, and keep shouting that 1.17 != 1.15. (of course they didn't say that, if they knew that the difference is this small, they would have stopped down voting)

It is not just 1.17 != 1.15, it's that his formula is additive instead of multiplicative which means it massively fails to predict the drop rate at high T.

It just happens to fall close to reality at t1-t3 but fails at high T.

1+6*.17 = 2.02 1.15^6 = 2.31

So 102% bonus at t6 vs 131%. That is not a small error.

My bad, as that comparison is incorrect. However, as you can see from the math I posted below using Blizzard's formula, the conclusion stays roughly the same. From looking at the original post, he changed the formula to reflect that of Blizzard's formula.

I've already spent way too much time on this to even debate all of these posts, but I feel like there are severe reading deficiencies abundant.

Therefore if a monster health increases at a non-linear rate, why not fit a curve to assume Blizzard is interpreting on a basis of time to kill a monster. The resulting DPS to overcome that time to kill a monster was my foundation. But, hey, if we want to go with 1.15^N - that just makes everyone's life simpler

Increasing torment levels makes it more difficult at a non-linear rate (i.e. torment 1 to 2 is easy, but torment 5 to 6 is not),

Look, Galiks. The increase between torment levels is 60%(1.6^N) hp, 45% damage(1.45^N), 40% gold/xp(1.4^N)* and 15%(1.15^N) legendary drops. As you can see they -all- follow the X^N pattern and there is near zero difference between T1->T2 and T5->T6.

I've already spent way too much time on this to even debate all of these posts, but I feel like there are severe reading deficiencies abundant.

Therefore if a monster health increases at a non-linear rate, why not fit a curve to assume Blizzard is interpreting on a basis of time to kill a monster. The resulting DPS to overcome that time to kill a monster was my foundation. But, hey, if we want to go with 1.15^N - that just makes everyone's life simpler

Increasing torment levels makes it more difficult at a non-linear rate (i.e. torment 1 to 2 is easy, but torment 5 to 6 is not),

Look, Galiks. The increase between torment levels is 60%(1.6^N) hp, 45% damage(1.45^N), 40% gold/xp(1.4^N)* and 15%(1.15^N) legendary drops. As you can see they -all- follow the X^N pattern and there is near zero difference between T1->T2 and T5->T6.

*This one is rounded to closest 50%

This is true. And I've had the 1.15^N chart there alongside all of my data. I gave a separate reference that assumed it was based upon a different factor (purely time to kill a monster). In the long run of it all, both approaches yield similar values except at high Torment levels and no differences in drop rates will be seen immediately. My data merely says that if you take samples of legendaries dropping over a long duration of time, they will converge to being affected by these linear coefficients. For the optimist, you consider MF and rifting. For the short term who lives in the present, you do whatever. If you disagree that right information was there all along, and that purely correct information is not there now, then we're at a loss.

I'm sure that the OP will welcome any criticism to his model and revise it according to where he feels that the criticism is warranted. He should be used to that as a PhD student. I would like to see his follow-up to the critical response. And we will never get any answers if we are required to blindly applaud attempts based on the amount of effort required in producing them. The correct way to honor a post such as the OPs is constructive criticism.

As for criticism based on the fact that simplifying assumptions have to be made, they are a bit unwarranted. Obviously we can't get a thousand people with the exact same build and gear to farm the same route a thousand times on different torment levels to get the required empirical data. This must be done with a priori logic. The OP equates mob health with time, and assumes that this accounts for the amount of instances to have a chance in a given timeframe (which is the real effect of MF, not the qualitative value of a single mob regardless of how many times you kill him, which is effectively uninteresting). The choice isn't between killing 1 skeleton with 30% more chance or 1 skeleton with 0% more chance, but in whether you want to kill 5 skeletons with 10% chance or 1 with 30% chance in a given minute. And the answer we are looking for is where exactly do the lines go for a hypothetical average character in the world of d3. Travel and loading time must be left as ceteris paribus in this respect. But arriving at general advice shouldn't be impossible. Perhaps it can be looked at relative to damage scaling from items; what does it take to one-shot a mob on normal, and how much more damage can be achieved relative to the percent increase in HP from torment levels relative to magic find? I don't know.

The OPs post can inform this question, but not if the values are wrong and certainly not if they are randomly chosen. We need more.

This man says it best. There are too many factors that can influence everything. My post assumes there is a near static rate in farming each Torment, but, as stated multiple times, one needs to make their own decision at which the highest Torment difficulty they can handle without significant downtime compared to the previous Torment level. However, I have reverted all data to 1.15^N conversion so its all entirely correct based upon the blue post. This man follows the logic upon equating mob HP with time that went into it, but we will 'dumb it down' to the now confirmed 1.15^N that came after I had done this study.

tldr; The graphs are right now. The right graphs were there before. Use logical decisions

I still think it's misleading to compare the drop rates with MF inside of a rift against the drop rates on a higher torment outside of the rift. It's not a good 1:1 comparison.

Really what it comes down to is let's say you are farming T3 rifts with 0 MF. If you can farm the T3 rift with 150 MF, and your kill rate is less than 15% slower than with 0 MF, it is worth it to wear 150 MF. That's also the same rule to decide which torment level to play on. If you can do T3 and it's less than 15% slower than T2, then it's worth it to do T3.

I think you guys are some silly assholes - sorry to say...
IÂ´ve never seen anything this childish or spoiled behaviour in Diablofans forum.....

This guy might not have been taking everything into account, as some of you mentioned, but instead of flaming and acting like some kids - who can only point out mistakes and tell what everybody else makes wrong....

You could tell it in a decent langauge and be gratefull for all the work he made here.......

IÂ´m really a shame about you guys comment above.....

Have you given him any thoughts about how heÂ´ll react??? He made a friendlt job here to support everybody else in their gaming....
And you conclude that this isnÂ´t worth anything....

I actually feel sorry for those who canÂ´t see the beuty in this work.

IÂ´ll like to thank this fella, for making a lovely post and reading material.

<3 Blitzher <3

Quote from RayaleithÂ»
Guys. Why do you have to flame the guy the made an effort? Indicating a mistake is fare. The others that ahve other ideas, how about making a new thread and so some actual research instead of bullshitting with napkin maths?

These people aren't being assholes. This is how criticism of math and science are done. This is how we learn things and improve our theories. You point out mistakes and provide corrections and suggestions. No one said Galiks was stupid or insulted him in any way. All they said was that his data or interpretations were incorrect, and that they needed to be corrected, especially as they were receiving a lot of attention in a prominent location.

I think people should stop complaining about drop rates. Its a video game, you're either going to play it or you're not. If the drop rate is 2% are you going to play the game more than if it was 1%? Just play the damn game and quit complaining. Play whatever torment level you're comfortable with or have fun on. The more gear you get the harder it will be to find upgrades, that's true for any game built around this concept.

I think people should stop complaining about drop rates. Its a video game, you're either going to play it or you're not. If the drop rate is 2% are you going to play the game more than if it was 1%? Just play the damn game and quit complaining. Play whatever torment level you're comfortable with or have fun on. The more gear you get the harder it will be to find upgrades, that's true for any game built around this concept.

Think you stumbled into the wrong thread my friend.

No its The right place. I understand the amount of effort that goes into all this and the information could be useful, if it was concrete. The reason blizzard withholds actual drop rates from us is to prevent people from acting a fool when the drop rate doesn't fall in their favor. Blizzard wants people to play the game, not spend hours of their time theory crafting on how to get max legendaries per hour. They basically told us "rifts give the best drop rates, regardless of torment levels." Play what you can farm efficiently. The hours spent establishing these theories could be spent enjoying (or not in some peoples cases) playing the game.

Captain obvious states that It all comes down to your gear folks, the fact of the matter is, it is always better to run rifts at the torment lvl it takes you the smallest relative possible time. Lets assume that your starting point is the gear only suited for comfortably breezing through T1. Since mob hp and difficulty increases exponentially you are better of staying at your current torment lvl as it will take you exponentially more time to complete harder torment lvls, and that is if you can actually do it. To give you an example, if you stick to torment 1 and play an x amount of time, playing twice (2x) that amount will yield twice the legendary drops( in average). If you spend a time of 2x but this time in torment 2 with the same T1 gear it will most definitely not yield twice the legendary drops but can potentially do worse than spending x time in Torment 1 . As you gear up that exponential curve of difficulty becomes more and more linear up to the ultimate point where the difficulty curve becomes a vertical line parallel to your x-axis, that is no matter what torment lvl you are playing it will require the same amount of time to complete a farming routine. Lets start with the 100% baseline at current difficulty, If you are playing say the next lvl of difficulty with a 115% legendary drop rate but it also takes 115% of the time of the previous difficulty respectively you are not really gaining anything. The optimal strategy is the following:

Play a few times in torment 1 and find the average time t1 it takes to complete your farming routine. Take note of that time, once you get better gear increase the difficulty and check how much time the same routine takes you. If it takes you 1.15 the time or moreto clear the same content it means you should go back to the previous difficulty. If takes you less than 1.15 the time then you can keep playing the increased difficulty and repeat the same process when you get even better gear. You can probably use a formula like this.

For each unit of time legendaries = (1*content cleared)x (drop rate). = 1*c*d at current baseline difficulty,
For next level of difficulty: legendaries = ( X*content cleared)x( 1.15 *drop rate) = X*c*d

where you clear less content per unit time for increased difficulty with the same gear. X = t1/t2 where t1 is the time taken to clear a farming routine at current difficulty and t2 is the time taken to clear the exact same routine at the new difficulty lvl with exactly the same gear. E.g if it takes 1.15 the time the ratio is X = 1/1.15 = 0.87. Compare the two drop rates and see which one is better for you.

Captain obvious states that It all comes down to your gear folks, the fact of the matter is, it is always better to run rifts at the torment lvl it takes you the smallest relative possible time.

Unless of course I just like the challenge and don't care about time efficiency, but rather FUN efficiency.

Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack

To post a comment, please login or register a new account.

Bashiok - http://us.battle.net...c/6019511928#17

1) Topaz means that you are losing out at minimum 5-15% DPS for 4.1% more legs (You'll lack either mainstat, 6% crit, 15% main-attack or resource regeneration).

2) Nagelring means you're also losing out 5-15% DPS for 5% more legs (You'll be missing out on CC, CD or mainstat)

3) Cains set means sacrificing some other 2-3 set piece that will most likely be worth more then 5%.

Now, since we know that raising torment gives you 15% more legendaries for 60% more enemy health, that means there's a 100:38~ ratio between magic find and damage, that is if you can get 100 MF and lose 38% of your DPS, then that is equivalent to playing on higher torment. However as I think most of us have noticed, playing on higher torment is not particularly efficient in legendaries per hour.

If losing 38% of your DPS means that you clear 10% or more slower, then the trade (or raising torment for that matter) was inefficient.

It just happens to fall close to reality at t1-t3 but fails at high T.

1+6*.17 = 2.02

1.15^6 = 2.31

So 102% bonus at t6 vs 131%. That is not a small error.

My bad, as that comparison is incorrect. However, as you can see from the math I posted below using Blizzard's formula, the conclusion stays roughly the same. From looking at the original post, he changed the formula to reflect that of Blizzard's formula.

*This one is rounded to closest 50%

tldr; The graphs are right now. The right graphs were there before. Use logical decisions

THis would be totally retarded and misleading, and also makes me very sad to have spent MAX TIER gems on the Cain set pieces.

Please Blizz this is stupid and should at least be stated INGAME so you know you are paying very much for so few.

Really what it comes down to is let's say you are farming T3 rifts with 0 MF. If you can farm the T3 rift with 150 MF, and your kill rate is less than 15% slower than with 0 MF, it is worth it to wear 150 MF. That's also the same rule to decide which torment level to play on. If you can do T3 and it's less than 15% slower than T2, then it's worth it to do T3.

These people aren't being assholes. This is how criticism of math and science are done. This is how we learn things and improve our theories. You point out mistakes and provide corrections and suggestions. No one said Galiks was stupid or insulted him in any way. All they said was that his data or interpretations were incorrect, and that they needed to be corrected, especially as they were receiving a lot of attention in a prominent location.

Total elites killed - 313 (1 Leg drop), don't know if rift guardians are included. (I don't know if they include minions in this number)

Normal mobs killed - 3295 (1 Leg drop). Lets assume I got lucky and do 1/5000 as the drop rate on t2 rift.

1 Leg drop from a vase or a chest don't remember the exact thing.

Total 3 leg.

I will try to do some more runs tomorrow to add more numbers to get some sort of baseline for it.

Play a few times in torment 1 and find the average time t1 it takes to complete your farming routine. Take note of that time, once you get better gear increase the difficulty and check how much time the same routine takes you. If it takes you 1.15 the time or moreto clear the same content it means you should go back to the previous difficulty. If takes you less than 1.15 the time then you can keep playing the increased difficulty and repeat the same process when you get even better gear. You can probably use a formula like this.

For each unit of time legendaries = (1*content cleared)x (drop rate). = 1*c*d at current baseline difficulty,

For next level of difficulty: legendaries = ( X*content cleared)x( 1.15 *drop rate) = X*c*d

where you clear less content per unit time for increased difficulty with the same gear. X = t1/t2 where t1 is the time taken to clear a farming routine at current difficulty and t2 is the time taken to clear the exact same routine at the new difficulty lvl with exactly the same gear. E.g if it takes 1.15 the time the ratio is X = 1/1.15 = 0.87. Compare the two drop rates and see which one is better for you.

http://us.battle.net/d3/en/forum/topic/12471197317?page=27#523