In D2, there was no difference in itemization or drops between offline and online play. That implications of that are part of why I say D2 trading was a player created feature rather than a game system. This is just to point out the inherent logical problem with saying "Trading has been a >>>>>huge<<<<< part of diablo since diablo 2" and then making a list of the way you "should" play.
Now, they have made statements that the existance of the AHs as a source of gear goes into their planning for base drop rates in Inferno and there is definitely a design intent to include trade. Yes, I agree D3 can't realistically be compared to D2 solo/lan even if I disagree with the design intent. I just don't feel that using D2 online trading is a valid justification for saying we should have expected that.
Actually there are Ladder only items in D2 and some of them were really really good. That was not introduced until much later in the games development cycle though. As it stands today, technically yes, the itemization is different on and offline. Obviously trading was "player created" but it's a little short sighted to dismiss it as not a part of the overall design philosophy. Regardless of how big a role Blizzard initially planned trading to be, at the end of the day it became a huge deal. It is now, and will always be a large part of their Diablo model. As has been said many times the inclusion of the AH was meant to keep trading done inside the platform.
MF increases the item 'rarity' level from magical to rare to legendary/set
MF does not increase the chance to get an i63 or any stat roll on the item
Put it this way, w/o 5NV and no additional MF. you normally get 1-2 rares per elite pack, with say 300MF getting 4 rares is pretty common.. Id dare say almost 90% of the time its 4 rares.
You are wrong MF does indeed increase stats rolls on items .....(next time u post such stuff be sure to read official blizzard site-forum of diablo3)
In D2, there was no difference in itemization or drops between offline and online play. That implications of that are part of why I say D2 trading was a player created feature rather than a game system. This is just to point out the inherent logical problem with saying "Trading has been a >>>>>huge<<<<< part of diablo since diablo 2" and then making a list of the way you "should" play.
Now, they have made statements that the existance of the AHs as a source of gear goes into their planning for base drop rates in Inferno and there is definitely a design intent to include trade. Yes, I agree D3 can't realistically be compared to D2 solo/lan even if I disagree with the design intent. I just don't feel that using D2 online trading is a valid justification for saying we should have expected that.
I find myself not outright disagreeing with you here, but I just feel like you've slightly missed the mark.
The one thing that I keep coming back to, mentally, is that almost every item has been tradeable in every Diablo title. To me that indicates that, even if there isn't a mechanism to facilitate trading, that the game was consciously designed in such a way that we could, and would, do so. It just feels not right to say that tradeable items weren't inherently designed like that for the purpose of item exchance.
There really should be no doubt that trading (in some form) has always been intended. D2 simply underestimated how much of it was going to go on in the Battle.net environment and they did, in fact, learn from that and tried to make it a more streamlined process in D3.
MF increases the item 'rarity' level from magical to rare to legendary/set
MF does not increase the chance to get an i63 or any stat roll on the item
Put it this way, w/o 5NV and no additional MF. you normally get 1-2 rares per elite pack, with say 300MF getting 4 rares is pretty common.. Id dare say almost 90% of the time its 4 rares.
You are wrong MF does indeed increase stats rolls on items .....(next time u post such stuff be sure to read official blizzard site-forum of diablo3)
It increases the odds of the item being rare and increases the odds that it will have more affixes. They way it actually seems to work is as follows. (Percentages are not accurate, I just used these numbers to make it easier to follow.)
You kill a mob that has a 10% chance to drop an i63, 15% chance to drop i62 and 20% chance to drop i61.
With 300% magic find it increases those chances by 300% so the numbers become as follows.
30% i63, 45% i62, 60% i61. Now when the item is generated it rolls from high to low so lets say it does a roll of 1-100.
71-100 = i63. If the roll is not between 71 and 100 it rolls again against the i62 stat.
66-100 = i62. If the roll is not between 66 and 100 it rolls again against the i61 stat.
41-100 = i61. If the roll is not between 41 and 100 it rolls again for i60 and so on until it succeeds.
Again the original percentages are not accurate, they are only being used so the math is easier to follow.
After the ilvl is determined another set of rolls is made. This time to determine the number of affixes.
Here come some more fake percentages.
6 affixes = 10%, 5 affixes = 20%, 4 affixes = everything else.
300% MF affects this roll as well. changing the numbers to the following.
6 affixes = 30%, 5 affixes = 60%, 4 affixes = everything else.
The 6 affix roll is made first.
71-100 = 6 affixes. If the roll is not between 71 and 100 it rolls again against the 5 affix stat.
66-100 = 5 affixes. If the roll is not between 66 and 100 it creates an item with 4 affixes
1 More time I will say that the percentages I used are not accurate, the numbers I chose were to make it easy to follow along.
Now is this what Blizzard explicitly said? No. This is what I have gathered from both experiences and from what I have read in official Blizzard posts.
This leads us to the conclusion that MF does indeed affect both the %chance that an item will be of a higher item level and have more stats. I don't know if MF has any say in what the actual stats rolled are. If you look at Legendary items, some of them say that they can have between W and X of a stat or Y and Z of the same stat so there may be a determining factor there that MF helps the percentages with but I have not seen anything to confirm that.
Now if a Blizzard employee could confirm this that would be awesome.
In D2, there was no difference in itemization or drops between offline and online play. That implications of that are part of why I say D2 trading was a player created feature rather than a game system. This is just to point out the inherent logical problem with saying "Trading has been a >>>>>huge<<<<< part of diablo since diablo 2" and then making a list of the way you "should" play.
Now, they have made statements that the existance of the AHs as a source of gear goes into their planning for base drop rates in Inferno and there is definitely a design intent to include trade. Yes, I agree D3 can't realistically be compared to D2 solo/lan even if I disagree with the design intent. I just don't feel that using D2 online trading is a valid justification for saying we should have expected that.
Actually there are Ladder only items in D2 and some of them were really really good. That was not introduced until much later in the games development cycle though. As it stands today, technically yes, the itemization is different on and offline. Obviously trading was "player created" but it's a little short sighted to dismiss it as not a part of the overall design philosophy. Regardless of how big a role Blizzard initially planned trading to be, at the end of the day it became a huge deal. It is now, and will always be a large part of their Diablo model. As has been said many times the inclusion of the AH was meant to keep trading done inside the platform.
Sorry for the double post, mea culpa.
Ladder is hard to even use as any form of comparison, however, because of the resets. Also, it was designed to combat the botting/duping and now the always online is supposed to be the method of doing that. Add in RMAH and it's probably not legal to do the gear/character resets and ladder is almost impossible to compare in a design discussion with D3.
I understand the point you were trying to make that eventually, online did itemize/loot differently. Since we say that they should not be repeating D2 mistakes in D3, I have to accept that even late game additions influenced design choices for D3. However, the fore-knowledge that these items would be destroyed makes the comparison hard.
I also realize that Blizz was not blind to the trade that occurred. I am not against the AH or even the RMAH. It is off topic, since this is supposed to be about MF, but I believe that the economy did not suffer from having solo drop rates even in multi-player D2. So why do they feel the need now to balance around x million hours played per month instead? Rare items are still rare and will have value accordingly. If the low-mid level market were to plummet, what would be the catastrophe? Inferno wouldn't be "hard"? Bots/exploits/broken talents have already destroyed that curve so...why hang onto that?
I respect where you are coming from. Late game elements in D2 should still provide learning material for Blizz in D3 design. Also, even if they didn't "support" trading in D2, they weren't blind to it and should use that as a part of the knowledge in designing D3. I'm just saying that as a player, it's unfair to say we should have expected Inferno/itemization/loot to be implemented the way they were. There was more than one way to approach the design decisions with the knowledge they had from D2. Comments like the one I originally quoted imply there was only one possible outcome.
In D2, there was no difference in itemization or drops between offline and online play. That implications of that are part of why I say D2 trading was a player created feature rather than a game system. This is just to point out the inherent logical problem with saying "Trading has been a >>>>>huge<<<<< part of diablo since diablo 2" and then making a list of the way you "should" play.
Now, they have made statements that the existance of the AHs as a source of gear goes into their planning for base drop rates in Inferno and there is definitely a design intent to include trade. Yes, I agree D3 can't realistically be compared to D2 solo/lan even if I disagree with the design intent. I just don't feel that using D2 online trading is a valid justification for saying we should have expected that.
I find myself not outright disagreeing with you here, but I just feel like you've slightly missed the mark.
The one thing that I keep coming back to, mentally, is that almost every item has been tradeable in every Diablo title. To me that indicates that, even if there isn't a mechanism to facilitate trading, that the game was consciously designed in such a way that we could, and would, do so. It just feels not right to say that tradeable items weren't inherently designed like that for the purpose of item exchance.
There really should be no doubt that trading (in some form) has always been intended. D2 simply underestimated how much of it was going to go on in the Battle.net environment and they did, in fact, learn from that and tried to make it a more streamlined process in D3.
I can totally agree with that. I wonder what influenced the desicion to use the same drop rates for both modes in D2 and then in D3, to make trade affect drop rates. I have to assume it was the desire to keep Inferno hard. If they had achieved that, I would have been ok with it. Since bots/exploits/broken talents ruined the difficulty design, I wonder how they intend to correct since RMAH practically prevents resets.
I really think if RMAH hadn't existed, they would have done a reset early in the game when some of these issues came to light. All in the name of preserving the intended difficulty of Inferno. How different would it be if they had been able to do that and preserve an even playing field?
MF increases the item 'rarity' level from magical to rare to legendary/set
MF does not increase the chance to get an i63 or any stat roll on the item
Put it this way, w/o 5NV and no additional MF. you normally get 1-2 rares per elite pack, with say 300MF getting 4 rares is pretty common.. Id dare say almost 90% of the time its 4 rares.
You are wrong MF does indeed increase stats rolls on items .....(next time u post such stuff be sure to read official blizzard site-forum of diablo3)
It increases the odds of the item being rare and increases the odds that it will have more affixes. They way it actually seems to work is as follows. (Percentages are not accurate, I just used these numbers to make it easier to follow.)
You kill a mob that has a 10% chance to drop an i63, 15% chance to drop i62 and 20% chance to drop i61.
With 300% magic find it increases those chances by 300% so the numbers become as follows.
30% i63, 45% i62, 60% i61. Now when the item is generated it rolls from high to low so lets say it does a roll of 1-100.
71-100 = i63. If the roll is not between 71 and 100 it rolls again against the i62 stat.
66-100 = i62. If the roll is not between 66 and 100 it rolls again against the i61 stat.
41-100 = i61. If the roll is not between 41 and 100 it rolls again for i60 and so on until it succeeds.
Again the original percentages are not accurate, they are only being used so the math is easier to follow.
After the ilvl is determined another set of rolls is made. This time to determine the number of affixes.
Here come some more fake percentages.
6 affixes = 10%, 5 affixes = 20%, 4 affixes = everything else.
300% MF affects this roll as well. changing the numbers to the following.
6 affixes = 30%, 5 affixes = 60%, 4 affixes = everything else.
The 6 affix roll is made first.
71-100 = 6 affixes. If the roll is not between 71 and 100 it rolls again against the 5 affix stat.
66-100 = 5 affixes. If the roll is not between 66 and 100 it creates an item with 4 affixes
1 More time I will say that the percentages I used are not accurate, the numbers I chose were to make it easy to follow along.
Now is this what Blizzard explicitly said? No. This is what I have gathered from both experiences and from what I have read in official Blizzard posts.
This leads us to the conclusion that MF does indeed affect both the %chance that an item will be of a higher item level and have more stats. I don't know if MF has any say in what the actual stats rolled are. If you look at Legendary items, some of them say that they can have between W and X of a stat or Y and Z of the same stat so there may be a determining factor there that MF helps the percentages with but I have not seen anything to confirm that.
Now if a Blizzard employee could confirm this that would be awesome.
No, the specifically said it does NOT work that way.
You have a % chance to have an iLvl 63 drop that is based on the act and mob that you kill. That does not get modified by anything. Then, it decides the item type (type and level, not sure which is first, probably doesn't matter).
From there, the rarity and the number of affixes roll in a single roll called quality. So a 6 affix rare and a 4 affix rare are two different entities in that table. You start at the least likely drop, a legendary. If that act and that mob have a 1% chance of legendary, then you add in your mf, so 300% would make that 3% chance. If you roll top 3% of the roll, it passed and a legendary drops (includes sets). If not, it failed and goes to the drop rate for the next, 6 affix rare. That base % plus your mf and roll for pass/fail again until you pass a check.
MF does not affect item level. Which affix is attached is rolled after the quality check and is not affected by mf as clearly stated in the game guide (produced by Blizzard and linked in my earlier response). The stat rolls come after the affix roles and although not explicitly stated, should not be affected by mf because the mf contribution has already been done on the quality roll.
Magic find affects the quality of items you acquire
That is saying it affects the quality roll and implies that's ALL it affects.
MF increases the item 'rarity' level from magical to rare to legendary/set
MF does not increase the chance to get an i63 or any stat roll on the item
Put it this way, w/o 5NV and no additional MF. you normally get 1-2 rares per elite pack, with say 300MF getting 4 rares is pretty common.. Id dare say almost 90% of the time its 4 rares.
You are wrong MF does indeed increase stats rolls on items .....(next time u post such stuff be sure to read official blizzard site-forum of diablo3)
It increases the odds of the item being rare and increases the odds that it will have more affixes. They way it actually seems to work is as follows. (Percentages are not accurate, I just used these numbers to make it easier to follow.)
You kill a mob that has a 10% chance to drop an i63, 15% chance to drop i62 and 20% chance to drop i61.
With 300% magic find it increases those chances by 300% so the numbers become as follows.
30% i63, 45% i62, 60% i61. Now when the item is generated it rolls from high to low so lets say it does a roll of 1-100.
71-100 = i63. If the roll is not between 71 and 100 it rolls again against the i62 stat.
66-100 = i62. If the roll is not between 66 and 100 it rolls again against the i61 stat.
41-100 = i61. If the roll is not between 41 and 100 it rolls again for i60 and so on until it succeeds.
Again the original percentages are not accurate, they are only being used so the math is easier to follow.
After the ilvl is determined another set of rolls is made. This time to determine the number of affixes.
Here come some more fake percentages.
6 affixes = 10%, 5 affixes = 20%, 4 affixes = everything else.
300% MF affects this roll as well. changing the numbers to the following.
6 affixes = 30%, 5 affixes = 60%, 4 affixes = everything else.
The 6 affix roll is made first.
71-100 = 6 affixes. If the roll is not between 71 and 100 it rolls again against the 5 affix stat.
66-100 = 5 affixes. If the roll is not between 66 and 100 it creates an item with 4 affixes
1 More time I will say that the percentages I used are not accurate, the numbers I chose were to make it easy to follow along.
Now is this what Blizzard explicitly said? No. This is what I have gathered from both experiences and from what I have read in official Blizzard posts.
This leads us to the conclusion that MF does indeed affect both the %chance that an item will be of a higher item level and have more stats. I don't know if MF has any say in what the actual stats rolled are. If you look at Legendary items, some of them say that they can have between W and X of a stat or Y and Z of the same stat so there may be a determining factor there that MF helps the percentages with but I have not seen anything to confirm that.
Now if a Blizzard employee could confirm this that would be awesome.
No, the specifically said it does NOT work that way.
You have a % chance to have an iLvl 63 drop that is based on the act and mob that you kill. That does not get modified by anything. Then, it decides the item type (type and level, not sure which is first, probably doesn't matter).
From there, the rarity and the number of affixes roll in a single roll called quality. So a 6 affix rare and a 4 affix rare are two different entities in that table. You start at the least likely drop, a legendary. If that act and that mob have a 1% chance of legendary, then you add in your mf, so 300% would make that 3% chance. If you roll top 3% of the roll, it passed and a legendary drops (includes sets). If not, it failed and goes to the drop rate for the next, 6 affix rare. That base % plus your mf and roll for pass/fail again until you pass a check.
MF does not affect item level. Which affix is attached is rolled after the quality check and is not affected by mf as clearly stated in the game guide (produced by Blizzard and linked in my earlier response). The stat rolls come after the affix roles and although not explicitly stated, should not be affected by mf because the mf contribution has already been done on the quality roll.
Magic find affects the quality of items you acquire
That is saying it affects the quality roll and implies that's ALL it affects.
This makes perfect sense too. That is why I said that it is "the way it seems to work" not this is how it works.
I don't believe that the way Blizzard explicitly explained it is clear enough and that is why there are so many topics and opinions about it.
Maybe a Blizzard employee should just put on the kid gloves and show us exactly what it changes and how.
MF increases the item 'rarity' level from magical to rare to legendary/set
MF does not increase the chance to get an i63 or any stat roll on the item
Put it this way, w/o 5NV and no additional MF. you normally get 1-2 rares per elite pack, with say 300MF getting 4 rares is pretty common.. Id dare say almost 90% of the time its 4 rares.
You are wrong MF does indeed increase stats rolls on items .....(next time u post such stuff be sure to read official blizzard site-forum of diablo3)
MF does not increase the stats on an item at all. You are wrong, terribly wrong. Why don't you go back and reread the Blizzard post you got that from. This time read every word and read it slowly so you can understand it. MF only effects the rarity of the item and the number or affixes associated to it, it has no effect what so ever on the stat rolls of the item.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Actually there are Ladder only items in D2 and some of them were really really good. That was not introduced until much later in the games development cycle though. As it stands today, technically yes, the itemization is different on and offline. Obviously trading was "player created" but it's a little short sighted to dismiss it as not a part of the overall design philosophy. Regardless of how big a role Blizzard initially planned trading to be, at the end of the day it became a huge deal. It is now, and will always be a large part of their Diablo model. As has been said many times the inclusion of the AH was meant to keep trading done inside the platform.
Nothing in the game guide says this so what is your basis for this comment?
http://us.battle.net/d3/en/game/guide/items/equipment#magic-find
I find myself not outright disagreeing with you here, but I just feel like you've slightly missed the mark.
The one thing that I keep coming back to, mentally, is that almost every item has been tradeable in every Diablo title. To me that indicates that, even if there isn't a mechanism to facilitate trading, that the game was consciously designed in such a way that we could, and would, do so. It just feels not right to say that tradeable items weren't inherently designed like that for the purpose of item exchance.
There really should be no doubt that trading (in some form) has always been intended. D2 simply underestimated how much of it was going to go on in the Battle.net environment and they did, in fact, learn from that and tried to make it a more streamlined process in D3.
It increases the odds of the item being rare and increases the odds that it will have more affixes. They way it actually seems to work is as follows. (Percentages are not accurate, I just used these numbers to make it easier to follow.)
You kill a mob that has a 10% chance to drop an i63, 15% chance to drop i62 and 20% chance to drop i61.
With 300% magic find it increases those chances by 300% so the numbers become as follows.
30% i63, 45% i62, 60% i61. Now when the item is generated it rolls from high to low so lets say it does a roll of 1-100.
71-100 = i63. If the roll is not between 71 and 100 it rolls again against the i62 stat.
66-100 = i62. If the roll is not between 66 and 100 it rolls again against the i61 stat.
41-100 = i61. If the roll is not between 41 and 100 it rolls again for i60 and so on until it succeeds.
Again the original percentages are not accurate, they are only being used so the math is easier to follow.
After the ilvl is determined another set of rolls is made. This time to determine the number of affixes.
Here come some more fake percentages.
6 affixes = 10%, 5 affixes = 20%, 4 affixes = everything else.
300% MF affects this roll as well. changing the numbers to the following.
6 affixes = 30%, 5 affixes = 60%, 4 affixes = everything else.
The 6 affix roll is made first.
71-100 = 6 affixes. If the roll is not between 71 and 100 it rolls again against the 5 affix stat.
66-100 = 5 affixes. If the roll is not between 66 and 100 it creates an item with 4 affixes
1 More time I will say that the percentages I used are not accurate, the numbers I chose were to make it easy to follow along.
Now is this what Blizzard explicitly said? No. This is what I have gathered from both experiences and from what I have read in official Blizzard posts.
This leads us to the conclusion that MF does indeed affect both the %chance that an item will be of a higher item level and have more stats. I don't know if MF has any say in what the actual stats rolled are. If you look at Legendary items, some of them say that they can have between W and X of a stat or Y and Z of the same stat so there may be a determining factor there that MF helps the percentages with but I have not seen anything to confirm that.
Now if a Blizzard employee could confirm this that would be awesome.
Demon Hunter - Fadeddeath
Monk - Lumos
Witch Doctor - Nox
Wizard - Nethershade
Sorry for the double post, mea culpa.
Ladder is hard to even use as any form of comparison, however, because of the resets. Also, it was designed to combat the botting/duping and now the always online is supposed to be the method of doing that. Add in RMAH and it's probably not legal to do the gear/character resets and ladder is almost impossible to compare in a design discussion with D3.
I understand the point you were trying to make that eventually, online did itemize/loot differently. Since we say that they should not be repeating D2 mistakes in D3, I have to accept that even late game additions influenced design choices for D3. However, the fore-knowledge that these items would be destroyed makes the comparison hard.
I also realize that Blizz was not blind to the trade that occurred. I am not against the AH or even the RMAH. It is off topic, since this is supposed to be about MF, but I believe that the economy did not suffer from having solo drop rates even in multi-player D2. So why do they feel the need now to balance around x million hours played per month instead? Rare items are still rare and will have value accordingly. If the low-mid level market were to plummet, what would be the catastrophe? Inferno wouldn't be "hard"? Bots/exploits/broken talents have already destroyed that curve so...why hang onto that?
I respect where you are coming from. Late game elements in D2 should still provide learning material for Blizz in D3 design. Also, even if they didn't "support" trading in D2, they weren't blind to it and should use that as a part of the knowledge in designing D3. I'm just saying that as a player, it's unfair to say we should have expected Inferno/itemization/loot to be implemented the way they were. There was more than one way to approach the design decisions with the knowledge they had from D2. Comments like the one I originally quoted imply there was only one possible outcome.
I can totally agree with that. I wonder what influenced the desicion to use the same drop rates for both modes in D2 and then in D3, to make trade affect drop rates. I have to assume it was the desire to keep Inferno hard. If they had achieved that, I would have been ok with it. Since bots/exploits/broken talents ruined the difficulty design, I wonder how they intend to correct since RMAH practically prevents resets.
I really think if RMAH hadn't existed, they would have done a reset early in the game when some of these issues came to light. All in the name of preserving the intended difficulty of Inferno. How different would it be if they had been able to do that and preserve an even playing field?
No, the specifically said it does NOT work that way.
You have a % chance to have an iLvl 63 drop that is based on the act and mob that you kill. That does not get modified by anything. Then, it decides the item type (type and level, not sure which is first, probably doesn't matter).
From there, the rarity and the number of affixes roll in a single roll called quality. So a 6 affix rare and a 4 affix rare are two different entities in that table. You start at the least likely drop, a legendary. If that act and that mob have a 1% chance of legendary, then you add in your mf, so 300% would make that 3% chance. If you roll top 3% of the roll, it passed and a legendary drops (includes sets). If not, it failed and goes to the drop rate for the next, 6 affix rare. That base % plus your mf and roll for pass/fail again until you pass a check.
MF does not affect item level. Which affix is attached is rolled after the quality check and is not affected by mf as clearly stated in the game guide (produced by Blizzard and linked in my earlier response). The stat rolls come after the affix roles and although not explicitly stated, should not be affected by mf because the mf contribution has already been done on the quality roll.
That is saying it affects the quality roll and implies that's ALL it affects.
This makes perfect sense too. That is why I said that it is "the way it seems to work" not this is how it works.
I don't believe that the way Blizzard explicitly explained it is clear enough and that is why there are so many topics and opinions about it.
Maybe a Blizzard employee should just put on the kid gloves and show us exactly what it changes and how.
Demon Hunter - Fadeddeath
Monk - Lumos
Witch Doctor - Nox
Wizard - Nethershade
MF does not increase the stats on an item at all. You are wrong, terribly wrong. Why don't you go back and reread the Blizzard post you got that from. This time read every word and read it slowly so you can understand it. MF only effects the rarity of the item and the number or affixes associated to it, it has no effect what so ever on the stat rolls of the item.