As a first I would like to point out that english is not my native language. Spelling errors are likely and my grammar is probably horrible, but I will do my best.
I can tell you're not a native speaker because your spelling and grammar is far better than any native
Those sentences I quoted are suspiciously well crafted in fact.
Perhaps now I wont have to reiterate in threads that MF does not increase the chance of getting higher ilvl now tho.
If you look at farming set amount of elite packs within a certain time span MF does seem to increase the amount of ilvl 63 items that you get indirectly.
Just a quick example (using data from the first post):
Lets say you farmed 100 elite packs within a time span of 2 hours in act 3,
- with 0% MF you gonna get 100 granted rares (assuming 5NV stacks) + ~10 more rares based on a roll,
- with 270% MF you'll end up with 100 granted + ~36 rare items.
The chance of getting ilvl 63 item in act 3 is 16,3% (according Blizzard blog post)
Out of those 26 extra rare items you will get ~4 ilvl63
So now we know that
- with 0% MF in 2 hours you get ~18 ilvl63 items,
- with 270% MF in 2 hours you get ~22 ilvl63 items.
I actually wonder if it's true, 'cause if you look from a certain-farming-time-span perspective MF does seem to increase the amount of ilvl63 items that you get.
// not a native English speaker too, so please don't mind my spelling/grammatical errors.
Perhaps now I wont have to reiterate in threads that MF does not increase the chance of getting higher ilvl now tho.
If you look at farming set amount of elite packs within a certain time span MF does seem to increase the amount of ilvl 63 items that you get indirectly.
Just a quick example (using data from the first post):
Lets say you farmed 100 elite packs within a time span of 2 hours in act 3,
- with 0% MF you gonna get 100 granted rares (assuming 5NV stacks) + ~10 more rares based on a roll,
- with 270% MF you'll end up with 100 granted + ~36 rare items.
The chance of getting ilvl 63 item in act 3 is 16,3% (according Blizzard blog post)
Out of those 26 extra rare items you will get ~4 ilvl63
So now we know that
- with 0% MF in 2 hours you get ~18 ilvl63 items,
- with 270% MF in 2 hours you get ~22 ilvl63 items.
I actually wonder if it's true, 'cause if you look from a certain-farming-time-span perspective MF does seem to increase the amount of ilvl63 items that you get.
// not a native English speaker too, so please don't mind my spelling/grammatical errors.
Yes, it is true you would get more ilvl 63 Rare items, but those items would have just been Common or Magic beforehand.
Few notes about magic find and how it works. Given that the system was officially fairly well explained in diablo2 and is confirmed to be the same now, I am pretty sure that the following is spot on.
1) The core of the system is designed around your usual normal monster, not bosses or champion packs. To understand the system, it is vital to understand how trash mobs drop loot first.
2) The percentage system works the same way as the hit system available in WoW. The hit system basically would push "misses" out of the table as you increased your other stats such as hit chance, crit hance, expertise etc.
In diablo, the system simply pushes your white and then blue percentages out of the metric if you manage to increase the percentages assigned to rares and legendaries.
This is the reason why point 1 is important: For trash mobs, the percentages of magic, rare and legendary drops are low enough that the available magic find gear will never be adequate to make mobs always drop rares or even blues.
3) Now it gets interesting: Rare monsters have a fixed interval for number of items they can drop. Each of those "slots", have a seperate modifier that multiplies your magic find number. Example, roughly:
SLOT1: 100% rare and above drop, thus base magic find of each person is increased by a large number, effectively pushing all blue and white drop chance percentags out of the table.
SLOT2: Same as slot one, but only pushing white drops out of the table.
SLOT3: Slightly weaker than slot 2.
SLOT4: Way weaker multiplier, usually around the same as trash mobs.
etc..
4) Magic find does not in any way change the item level. Magic find only manipulates the "drop table". Think of it as increasing your hit chance or crit chance.
5) This system is farily simple, I don't understand why there is a debatte about it every other week.
In diablo, the system simply pushes your white and then blue percentages out of the metric if you manage to increase the percentages assigned to rares and legendaries.
Thanks for the post, but the data does not support this. Blue percentages drop with more Magic Find, not just White. If it were as you describe in that simplicity, this would not be the case, Blue percentages would stay the same until White were completely gone. The data do not match this at all.
This is why Cyeron is doing the hard graft, instead of relying on received wisdom, which more often than not, is wrong.
In diablo, the system simply pushes your white and then blue percentages out of the metric if you manage to increase the percentages assigned to rares and legendaries.
Thanks for the post, but the data does not support this. Blue percentages drop with more Magic Find, not just White. If it were as you describe in that simplicity, this would not be the case, Blue percentages would stay the same until White were completely gone. The data do not match this at all.
This is why Cyeron is doing the hard graft, instead of relying on received wisdom, which more often than not, is wrong.
Read the part where I mentioned how every slot on champs(+gobs etc) has a different multiplier.
PS: To put it more clearly: Inconsistencies you see come from the slot multipliers. That is, they are not inconsistencies, they are just errors in understanding how those drops infact are not coming from the same table.
Also, for the same reason, you should always consider that even though you are seeing 4-5 drops from the same boss, they are coming from completely different distributions nonetheless. And thus it is important to not put them all into the same pool, which renders the result a bit pointless as it is not clear which distribution each item belongs to.
You may well be right, the data can be pushed to be consistent with either version. I "prefer" a simpler system where each roll is independent, but weighting things so the one "slot" is more likely to be a good item and one is more likely to be a bad one to control the standard deviation of drops of each class (rare, magic, white) a bit more is not a bad system, and apparently that was confirmed as being used in D2? (through reverse engineering the server I assume, which was in the public hands with D2...) so perhaps that is how it's done.
What matters is the end result, which is, I suppose, how many rares you get... The route there doesn't matter so much. Even if a slot system is used to control the randomness, the average results can still be predicted and a formula still arrived at that models reality sufficiently well without the need for (the nigh impossible task) of working out how the slots work. If it's slotted like that, my simple formula definitely won't work though! (And since it doesn't really on the current low end data, it supports a drop table system, with different slots.)
If more data keep to that same basic graph shape, it's interesting that the value of MF seems to increase the higher you get it.
Given that the system was officially fairly well explained in diablo2 and is confirmed to be the same now, I am pretty sure that the following is spot on.
...
5) This system is farily simple, I don't understand why there is a debatte about it every other week.
All we have is a statement. While it is quite solid in itself, there is nothing wrong with collecting all of the information into a single thread (which is the point by this). It is not supposed to be another of the minor debate threads. The data I collected only support these facts. Also, even though things work the same as in D2, the relevant parameters (such as max obtainable MF) and the effect of MF is most likely not similar. Furthermore is the application of NV (I don't know if there is a D2 counterpart of this, I haven't played it for years).
If more data keep to that same basic graph shape, it's interesting that the value of MF seems to increase the higher you get it.
I know it is very tempting to join this idea of MF's effect, especially since it is assumed to be the other way around, but we need more than just data points for goblin to see if this trend is true.
None-the-less you are more than welcome to contribute with your formulas/predictions. I hope that the graph in 2.2 will have sufficient data soon and that I can get to test out elite farming by mid/end of July.
Have you looked into the number of affixes that drop on level 63 gear?
I was trying to figure out the relative time cost to 'craft' vs farming
From napkin math most of the 63 gear I have found is 4 affix
~10% have been 5-6
This has held true for act 1 and 2
I haven't bothered with act 3 yet due to the rate I can clear the other acts.
However I only farm with 300+ mf while i doubt mf will affect the quality (in this case number of affixes not ilvl) I was curious if actual data backs this up.
Just one more thing to track if your up for it, and it is hard to tell due to the 60 vit/ 90 int affix roles
Given that the system was officially fairly well explained in diablo2 and is confirmed to be the same now, I am pretty sure that the following is spot on.
...
5) This system is farily simple, I don't understand why there is a debatte about it every other week.
All we have is a statement. While it is quite solid in itself, there is nothing wrong with collecting all of the information into a single thread (which is the point by this). It is not supposed to be another of the minor debate threads. The data I collected only support these facts. Also, even though things work the same as in D2, the relevant parameters (such as max obtainable MF) and the effect of MF is most likely not similar. Furthermore is the application of NV (I don't know if there is a D2 counterpart of this, I haven't played it for years).
If more data keep to that same basic graph shape, it's interesting that the value of MF seems to increase the higher you get it.
I know it is very tempting to join this idea of MF's effect, especially since it is assumed to be the other way around, but we need more than just data points for goblin to see if this trend is true.
None-the-less you are more than welcome to contribute with your formulas/predictions. I hope that the graph in 2.2 will have sufficient data soon and that I can get to test out elite farming by mid/end of July.
who you do so big research when in Blue Posts was stated everything you said just now about week ago ?
Haters gonna hate.
Edit: if you want to know the reason, read section 1.1: It is explained there.
NV is nothing but 1-2 additional slots as I have explained above, obviously aside from the flat MF buff it gives. Anyways everything is I think fairly well explained.
Having reversed the game client code for generating the attribute values from the initial seed, I can say with 100% certainty that MF does not affect the "rolls" for your attribute values. Those are entirely determined by: 1) the seed, 2) the order that the affixes appear.
MF works in D3 pretty much like it did in D2. It doesn't affect the Treasure Classes at all which is what determined the number of items and their ilvl. It only affects the rarity which is only determined after an item has been set to drop.
NV is nothing but 1-2 additional slots as I have explained above, obviously aside from the flat MF buff it gives. Anyways everything is I think fairly well explained.
If everything is fairly well explained and readily available we wouldn't see so many threads/posts appearing about how stuff works.
Yes MF has been looked into before (in D2).
Yes MF is said to work the same in D3.
Does that make it less valuable to collect the effect of MF in a single thread on a forum, that is rather large and easily accessible via seach engines? I beg to differ. Alot of people playing D3 will eventually come here searching for answers (in general) - I don't see why there's so much trouble with me making a single post that can work as a central standpoint for people getting their questions answered regarding MF and its effect.
If you could by any chance contribute to the original post by finding a source explaining the slot system I would be more than happy to add it.
NV is nothing but 1-2 additional slots as I have explained above, obviously aside from the flat MF buff it gives. Anyways everything is I think fairly well explained.
If everything is fairly well explained and readily available we wouldn't see so many threads/posts appearing about how stuff works.
Yes MF has been looked into before (in D2).
Yes MF is said to work the same in D3.
Does that make it less valuable to collect the effect of MF in a single thread on a forum, that is rather large and easily accessible via seach engines? I beg to differ. Alot of people playing D3 will eventually come here searching for answers (in general) - I don't see why there's so much trouble with me making a single post that can work as a central standpoint for people getting their questions answered regarding MF and its effect.
If you could by any chance contribute to the original post by finding a source explaining the slot system I would be more than happy to add it.
Don't really want to argue. Just some info there for those who like to optimize their MF and wonder why they see strange results.
Don't really want to argue. Just some info there for those who like to optimize their MF and wonder why they see strange results.
I am not trying to argue with you I am simply asking for a source that backs up your post. I find that being a quite reasonable request.
- - -
[Update]:
As of tomorrow I will be trying to redesign the original post to fit the responses seen so far.
One thing I appearently need to make clear is the purpose of the post. Many people seem to think I believe to have made ground-breaking analyses about MF. That is not the case.
This thread is still in a very early stage and that is obviously not very clear yet.
As of the data collection, more effort will be made in this week and the following to further improve section 2.2.
After this data collection will be made targeted towards elite and boss farming (most likely act I warden+butcher runs to speed the collection up).
I would, however, like to thank all of you people that come here and leave feedback.
I can tell you're not a native speaker because your spelling and grammar is far better than any native
Those sentences I quoted are suspiciously well crafted in fact.
If you look at farming set amount of elite packs within a certain time span MF does seem to increase the amount of ilvl 63 items that you get indirectly.
Just a quick example (using data from the first post):
Lets say you farmed 100 elite packs within a time span of 2 hours in act 3,
- with 0% MF you gonna get 100 granted rares (assuming 5NV stacks) + ~10 more rares based on a roll,
- with 270% MF you'll end up with 100 granted + ~36 rare items.
The chance of getting ilvl 63 item in act 3 is 16,3% (according Blizzard blog post)
Out of those 26 extra rare items you will get ~4 ilvl63
So now we know that
- with 0% MF in 2 hours you get ~18 ilvl63 items,
- with 270% MF in 2 hours you get ~22 ilvl63 items.
I actually wonder if it's true, 'cause if you look from a certain-farming-time-span perspective MF does seem to increase the amount of ilvl63 items that you get.
// not a native English speaker too, so please don't mind my spelling/grammatical errors.
-
View User Profile
-
View Posts
-
Send Message
Curse PremiumYes, it is true you would get more ilvl 63 Rare items, but those items would have just been Common or Magic beforehand.
1) The core of the system is designed around your usual normal monster, not bosses or champion packs. To understand the system, it is vital to understand how trash mobs drop loot first.
2) The percentage system works the same way as the hit system available in WoW. The hit system basically would push "misses" out of the table as you increased your other stats such as hit chance, crit hance, expertise etc.
In diablo, the system simply pushes your white and then blue percentages out of the metric if you manage to increase the percentages assigned to rares and legendaries.
This is the reason why point 1 is important: For trash mobs, the percentages of magic, rare and legendary drops are low enough that the available magic find gear will never be adequate to make mobs always drop rares or even blues.
3) Now it gets interesting: Rare monsters have a fixed interval for number of items they can drop. Each of those "slots", have a seperate modifier that multiplies your magic find number. Example, roughly:
SLOT1: 100% rare and above drop, thus base magic find of each person is increased by a large number, effectively pushing all blue and white drop chance percentags out of the table.
SLOT2: Same as slot one, but only pushing white drops out of the table.
SLOT3: Slightly weaker than slot 2.
SLOT4: Way weaker multiplier, usually around the same as trash mobs.
etc..
4) Magic find does not in any way change the item level. Magic find only manipulates the "drop table". Think of it as increasing your hit chance or crit chance.
5) This system is farily simple, I don't understand why there is a debatte about it every other week.
Hope this clears things up a bit.
Thanks for the post, but the data does not support this. Blue percentages drop with more Magic Find, not just White. If it were as you describe in that simplicity, this would not be the case, Blue percentages would stay the same until White were completely gone. The data do not match this at all.
This is why Cyeron is doing the hard graft, instead of relying on received wisdom, which more often than not, is wrong.
Read the part where I mentioned how every slot on champs(+gobs etc) has a different multiplier.
PS: To put it more clearly: Inconsistencies you see come from the slot multipliers. That is, they are not inconsistencies, they are just errors in understanding how those drops infact are not coming from the same table.
Also, for the same reason, you should always consider that even though you are seeing 4-5 drops from the same boss, they are coming from completely different distributions nonetheless. And thus it is important to not put them all into the same pool, which renders the result a bit pointless as it is not clear which distribution each item belongs to.
What matters is the end result, which is, I suppose, how many rares you get... The route there doesn't matter so much. Even if a slot system is used to control the randomness, the average results can still be predicted and a formula still arrived at that models reality sufficiently well without the need for (the nigh impossible task) of working out how the slots work. If it's slotted like that, my simple formula definitely won't work though! (And since it doesn't really on the current low end data, it supports a drop table system, with different slots.)
If more data keep to that same basic graph shape, it's interesting that the value of MF seems to increase the higher you get it.
I thank thee! (and laughed inside at that comment)
I'm gonna hold you on that.
All we have is a statement. While it is quite solid in itself, there is nothing wrong with collecting all of the information into a single thread (which is the point by this). It is not supposed to be another of the minor debate threads. The data I collected only support these facts. Also, even though things work the same as in D2, the relevant parameters (such as max obtainable MF) and the effect of MF is most likely not similar. Furthermore is the application of NV (I don't know if there is a D2 counterpart of this, I haven't played it for years).
I know it is very tempting to join this idea of MF's effect, especially since it is assumed to be the other way around, but we need more than just data points for goblin to see if this trend is true.
None-the-less you are more than welcome to contribute with your formulas/predictions. I hope that the graph in 2.2 will have sufficient data soon and that I can get to test out elite farming by mid/end of July.
Haters gonna hate.
Edit: if you want to know the reason, read section 1.1: It is explained there.
I was trying to figure out the relative time cost to 'craft' vs farming
From napkin math most of the 63 gear I have found is 4 affix
~10% have been 5-6
This has held true for act 1 and 2
I haven't bothered with act 3 yet due to the rate I can clear the other acts.
However I only farm with 300+ mf while i doubt mf will affect the quality (in this case number of affixes not ilvl) I was curious if actual data backs this up.
Just one more thing to track if your up for it, and it is hard to tell due to the 60 vit/ 90 int affix roles
NV is nothing but 1-2 additional slots as I have explained above, obviously aside from the flat MF buff it gives. Anyways everything is I think fairly well explained.
MF works in D3 pretty much like it did in D2. It doesn't affect the Treasure Classes at all which is what determined the number of items and their ilvl. It only affects the rarity which is only determined after an item has been set to drop.
If everything is fairly well explained and readily available we wouldn't see so many threads/posts appearing about how stuff works.
Yes MF has been looked into before (in D2).
Yes MF is said to work the same in D3.
Does that make it less valuable to collect the effect of MF in a single thread on a forum, that is rather large and easily accessible via seach engines? I beg to differ. Alot of people playing D3 will eventually come here searching for answers (in general) - I don't see why there's so much trouble with me making a single post that can work as a central standpoint for people getting their questions answered regarding MF and its effect.
If you could by any chance contribute to the original post by finding a source explaining the slot system I would be more than happy to add it.
Don't really want to argue. Just some info there for those who like to optimize their MF and wonder why they see strange results.
I am not trying to argue with you I am simply asking for a source that backs up your post. I find that being a quite reasonable request.
- - -
[Update]:
As of tomorrow I will be trying to redesign the original post to fit the responses seen so far.
One thing I appearently need to make clear is the purpose of the post. Many people seem to think I believe to have made ground-breaking analyses about MF. That is not the case.
This thread is still in a very early stage and that is obviously not very clear yet.
As of the data collection, more effort will be made in this week and the following to further improve section 2.2.
After this data collection will be made targeted towards elite and boss farming (most likely act I warden+butcher runs to speed the collection up).
I would, however, like to thank all of you people that come here and leave feedback.
Edit: typo
and hence the TL;DR was born