EDIT: Should MF diminishing returns be a secret?

"

Gravethought wrote:

The character screen should show you how much magic find you actually have after DR. Noone is asking or needs to know what the modifier for monsters are. However, a player should know what his gear is actually giving him so he can make the tradeoffs he wants.

This seems pretty clear cut, a player might be only gaining 10% actual rarity while going from say 300 to 400 on gear. Hiding diminishing returns is pretty much lying to the player, and bet a large number of people don't even know DR exists on MF stats currently.

This, it makes no sense to be told a number that is actually rationally incorrect. The practical number should be given.

i dont really care either ways.

its not like you have a good idea of what 300 mf did anyways.

"

Nephalim wrote:

i dont really care either ways.

its not like you have a good idea of what 300 mf did anyways.

Actually, if the game didn't have diminishing returns, we would have a very good idea of what 300% mf would do.

"

SL4Y3R wrote:

Theres already diminished returns in the game.

adding on: for MF

I edited the title and thread a bit to more clearly define my question. I wasn't really asking if diminishing returns were good or bad, rather, should we be kept in the dark about when & where they happen?

This game is all about character planning, building, min/maxing. Without the info on MF DR we have no idea how much is worthy of a good MF character and when it's useless to stack more.

I think a game like this needs to have definite numbers known. No one wants to spend 90 levels and not really know how their char works. I mean some will but most wont.

As a side note, I don't think IIR/IIQ should have diminishing returns for reason I plan on posting later on in my own topic, dealing economies.


Also while we are at it, I would like to have an option for on screen damage. It was the one thing I liked from D3, and TL1/2

On the new question of making diminishing returns values public-
I could go either way on the subject. I think players should be empowered with information that effects us. This makes it more strategic. However, some people like to discover things and have some mystery. That makes it more personal. Some will like it to be strategic and some will like it to be personal. Both have valid reasons to advocate their position, but the two positions are opposite. So either way is fine.

What they really should day is change IIR/IIQ into ratings. Then everyone can feel happy that their numbers reflect reality.

Personally, I think the decision to go diminishing returns is a poor one. As OP said, if an item says it gives you a stat it should. If IIR with magics is currently okay but IIR with uniques is currently OP, that's fine; just split up the affix into three different rates, showing the actual increase for each. You did it with Punishment, after all.

That said, I don't really care whether GGG releases the diminishing returns information or not. It doesn't really solve the problem for the common player, who doesn't check the forums all the time as we chaps do; for them, it's still a mystery mechanic, and worse they probably won't even be aware there are diminishing returns of any kind. You're damned if you do, and damned if you don't.

So how about instead of worrying about whether GGG releases diminishing returns info or not, we just attack the heart of the problem: fuck diminishing returns, tell us right on the item what the item actually does.

I like diminishing returns, I don't like not knowing them.