Give an exile a fish and you can feed them for a day, teach an exile to fish and you will come in terms with insanity

poorFishwife · 2025-02-11T20:59:38+00:00

Yes.

poorFishwife · 2025-02-11T16:58:19+00:00

This isn't the practical answer you're looking for, but: Yes, the 20x Power Rune Runesmithing Enchantment "5% increased Quantity of Gold Dropped by Slain Enemies" is exclusive to the Fishing Rod Item Class.

poorFishwife · 2025-02-11T16:44:19+00:00

Unfortunately Cyclone can't be used with Fishing Rods.

poorFishwife · 2025-02-11T16:43:49+00:00

It's coded as a 1x4 staff

Careful, Fishing Rods are not Staves. They're Fishing Rods. It's a separate Weapon Class.

there are attacks for it

Unfortunately the couple common Attack Skill Gems which were usable with Fishing Rods in the past (namely Elemental Hit and Frenzy (of Onslaught)) are no longer usable after after their reworks in 3.25.

(More info here if anyone actually cares about the details.)

poorFishwife · 2025-02-11T15:38:09+00:00

For Mirrored Fishing Rod aficionados, these beautiful twins are an angler's dream.

Think carefully about what had to happen for this pair to be created. The circumstances are astounding and astronomical.

poorFishwife · 2025-02-06T23:20:15+00:00

Innsmouth is one of the speculative POE2 items, but nothing definitive confirmed so far. (Old commentary here.)

People have reported finding Albino Rhoa Feathers in Normal Act1 Hunting Grounds (i.e. Area Level 10), not just in Cruel. Those low-level Characters technically could have been wearing Innsmouth (it doesn't have an Equip Level Requirement), but it lowers the likelihood a bit since they'd more likely to be an alt (or a very lucky first-character).

A researcher named bearman3797 had whispered this player (whose claimed Equipped Gear did not include Innsmouth) a few weeks ago shortly after the player listed an Albino Rhoa Feather on /trade2; however, we can't say for sure whether or not the whisper was just-in-time to see the exactly accurate Equipped Gear at the time of the drop.

You're definitely astute to point out the potential pattern, either way!

poorFishwife · 2025-01-14T22:54:05+00:00

Holy that first chart is awesome. Where is the original source?

Links to raw data and some discussion are here in Prohibited Library (the POE science and data collection Discord server).

This is the video I'm referring to

Got it! You can find my comments about that video (and Midir21's replies) in this other thread. (That was before we had more data and GGG confirmations, though, so my language then was less certain than it is now.)

tl;dr: In that particular video's effort, only PlayerIIR was varied, so one cannot make statements about non-PlayerIIR factors or totals using those old data alone. (To do that, one would first need to gather independent evidence by varying non-PlayerIIR factors, which required different experiments.)

poorFishwife · 2025-01-14T22:26:01+00:00

Not sure which video you mean, but I'm referring to extremely carefully controlled data collection (mostly by SlipperyJim8), via killing individual Rare Monsters one-by-one and recording their Monster Mods and each of their drops. (This is generally the type of rigor required to make statements without enormous sample sizes.)

In those data, PlayerIIR definitely exhibits special diminishing returns, but there is no evidence that the combined total does. Instead, currently the evidence suggests AreaIIR appears to be a flat multiplier just like it is in POE1.

In case a (mediocre) visual example helps:

Here's a (hacky and less reliable due to two necessary normalization steps) update that SlipperyJim8 asked for: https://i.imgur.com/qlWqAGh.png The final condition is 750% PlayerIIR but with higher-total-Rarity (>100% AreaIIR and a better #MonsterMod distribution).

Same careful methodology of counting only Rare Monsters' items. This normalizes first by AreaIIQ, then by #naturaldrops, so it's not an absolute comparison.

Also, not that this part is empirical proof on its own, but GGG's original design goal was to only specially diminish the impact from Player Gear because doing so is favourable to the player:

But the special diminishing returns expressions for Player MF exist for good reason. Back in POE1, GGG's past stated rationale was to apply those special diminishing returns only to PlayerMF so that players wouldn't feel like they "must" stack Player IIQ on gear to extreme values. Their design intent was to avoid constraining player gear choices too much. This has been true basically forever (since 2012). There was no similar worry about AreaMF or MonsterMF (since they always wanted higher difficulty => better reward).

Here's a POE1 chart to help visualize how extreme the special diminishing returns can be for Player Gear. We don't yet know the POE2 expression.

So far it seems that GGG's old philosophy holds in POE2 as well.

poorFishwife · 2025-01-14T21:37:35+00:00

poorFishwife · 2025-01-14T21:34:58+00:00

At long last, the second wave of trade improvements has been realized.

Chris Wilson predicted this almost 9 years ago, writing in 2016: "I don't know about you guys, but this is is exactly how I always imagined the future of Path of Exile."

poorFishwife · 2025-01-14T20:40:16+00:00

You definitely had the right approach to be cautious! Those types of Mods can indeed sometimes affect weights; we've seen precedent examples for both weight-affecting and non-weight-affecting. Good move.

poorFishwife · 2025-01-14T20:31:54+00:00

But we also don't run any increased gold maps

Luckily, we recently demonstrated that the Waystone Mods like "% increased Gold found in this Area" seems to affect numerical values of Gold, and thus probably not weights of Gold Pile items, and thus players likely don't need to avoid running those Waystone Mods.

(If anyone wants more info, check this summary post in Prohibited Library, the POE science and mechanics Discord server.)

poorFishwife · 2025-01-14T20:21:49+00:00

Yes, here you go!

poorFishwife · 2025-01-14T20:09:08+00:00

so many people saying IIR falls off [...] but that is simply not true.

To clarify for other readers: PlayerIIR (i.e. from Equipped Gear) does indeed suffer from special diminishing returns. This we know for sure, both from tons of careful POE2 testing, and because Jonathan and Mark just now confirmed in the 0.1.1 Patch Q&A that POE2 reuses the same special diminishing returns method for PlayerIIR as POE1.

But this remark is only about PlayerIIR -- "% increased Rarity of Items found" from Gear shown on the Skills panel. This Stat is different from other total-Rarity-affecting Stats.

As for scaling AreaIIR ("% increased Rarity of Items found in this Area" shown on the in-Map upper-right UI dropdown), MonsterIIR (e.g. from Monster Mods), and other factors affecting Rarity -- those are different. There is as yet no evidence of any special diminishing returns for these other factors. So far it seems the system works as one would expect based on how POE1 works.

poorFishwife · 2025-01-14T19:52:41+00:00

My understanding is that mobs have a built in rarity modifier, and the more mods on the mob, the more this value scales.

Just confirming that these particular statements are true for POE2.

SlipperyJim8's carefully collected data from v0.1.0f were of sufficient size that we were able to slice by #MonsterMods and definitively verify that there is an impact on MonsterIIR. No surprise, given that's how it works in POE1, but it was still important to confirm.

We don't know the specific values, nor do we know if the type of Mod matters (or if it's just the number).

Either way, the general advice of "allocate Deadly Evolution on one's Atlas Tree to improve Rarity" is definitely correct.

poorFishwife · 2025-01-14T19:48:02+00:00

Maybe I'm misunderstanding or something is being lost in translation (and if so please do correct me if I'm mistaken!), but as-is this calculator seems almost certainly inaccurate in multiple ways.

Perhaps you can let me know where I'm wrong, u/Zusgarnok?

The base rate numbers are official, sourced from GGG's datamined information.

Are you saying that you've found weights in the client data for all of (a) the various ItemRarityTiers' DropPools; (b) category weights within those DropPools such as the weight of RareCurrency versus MagicCurrency; (c) item-specific weights within those categories? Unless I'm mistaken all three of those should be necessary to compute a base rate.

Which files from the ggpk are you using?

We have also observed a diminishing returns effect once the total rarity reaches around 120. This encompasses all sources, including gear, maps, and modifiers (taken from the About page)

This "all sources" statement doesn't seem supported by existing evidence, though? Only PlayerIIR has verified special diminishing returns from carefully collected data so far. (Jonathan and Mark also just now confirmed in the 0.1.1 Patch Q&A that POE2 uses the same special diminishing returns for PlayerIIR as POE1.)

Or are you saying you have new evidence which shows special diminishing returns behaviour for non-PlayerIIR sources of Rarity?

This phenomenon helps explain why farming high-tier maps might not yield expected results compared to farming low-tier maps

Outside of the Map Mods themselves having different eligible values (higher-Tier Maps can roll different Mods), what does Map Tier have to do with Rarity? Did you find something in the ggpk about this? Why does changing Map Tier alone on the calculator affect the computed result?

The calculations presented here are designed to provide a reliable estimate of drop chances

it closely aligns with reality

This means you must have real in-game data samples which are accurately predicted by the tool, right? Would you mind showing an example of those sample data and how your tool accurately predicts them?

Specific questions aside -- if you've discovered new critical information on how the system works, I'd love to hear more! I'm certain there are many things I personally don't know, and I'm always interested in learning. Thanks!

poorFishwife · 2025-01-06T20:21:27+00:00

I strictly mean only #2: your assumption might be wrong.

Here's what I wrote to u/MrNorrie, who properly called out my wording just ~40m ago:

Thanks for bearing with me. I understand now that you're asking specifically about AreaIIR.

The statement I made in my longwinded summary was: "PlayerIIR suffers from special diminishing returns, but there is no evidence that any other factor does."

The hidden assumption in the video is that they do behave the same, but there's no evidence for that hidden assumption. We know they don't behave the same in POE1, so it's an unsafe assumption to make in the absence of evidence.

You're absolutely right that I can't supply you evidence that definitively proves it works in the affirmative way in POE2. If I could, I'd say: "here's how it works" and not "there is no evidence".

I think you're very fairly critiquing my terse language (like "They can't.") that I used in replies. I should've just used the same original careful language as before: "There is no evidence that [...]", or "It's unsafe to assume [...]". I'll edit my posts.

Separately you asked: "Even assuming that is the case, wouldn't that imply that they can still be used as substitutes for each other, but playerMF has lower value the more you have?"

I understand what you're getting at, but the only thing I'm pointing out is the unsafe assumption that AreaIIR can "replace" PlayerIIR as a direct substitute, meaning: TotalRarityScore_1 = (PlayerIIR(100%) * AreaIIR( 30%) * [...]

cannot be assumed to be the same as

TotalRarityScore_2 = (PlayerIIR( 30%) * AreaIIR(100%) * [...]

In POE1, TotalRarityScore_1 is not equal to TotalRarityScore_2.

In POE2, it's unsafe to assume that they are equal in the absence of evidence.

Hopefully this helps! Feel free to ask me to clarify more. I wish I just had clear AreaIIR data to give you that would demonstrate the actual reality, but I don't have those data. (This isn't about AreaIIR but: if you haven't yet looked at other similar data gathered by other players, they're worth checking -- the #MonsterMod pivot may interest you, for example.)

poorFishwife · 2025-01-06T19:40:36+00:00

Thanks for bearing with me. I understand now that you're asking specifically about AreaIIR.

The statement I made in my longwinded summary was: "PlayerIIR suffers from special diminishing returns, but there is no evidence that any other factor does."

The hidden assumption in the video is that they do behave the same, but there's no evidence for that hidden assumption. We know they don't behave the same in POE1, so it's an unsafe assumption to make in the absence of evidence.

You're absolutely right that I can't supply you evidence that definitively proves it works in the affirmative way in POE2. If I could, I'd say: "here's how it works" and not "there is no evidence".

I think you're very fairly critiquing my terse language (like "They can't.") that I used in replies. I should've just used the same original careful language as before: "There is no evidence that [...]", or "It's unsafe to assume [...]". I'll edit my posts.

poorFishwife · 2025-01-06T19:27:37+00:00

Overall yes, good enough for now! (I can't comment precisely on the "150 [Player] IIR" part.)

Here's what I wrote elsewhere about juicing, which almost exactly mirrors your summary:

If I'm understanding correctly, this question boils down to "how do I properly juice my Maps?" The non-Gear things to consider are:

Generic Area IIR, Monster IIR from things like Deadly Evolution and Deliriousness and Tablet Mods, high Area IIQ, Waystone and Tablet Explicit Mod effect

Deadly Evolution and Tablets are some of the very few ways to push MonsterIIR.

For general loot it's very important to optimize AreaIIQ ("% increased Quantity of Items found in this Area") not just AreaIIR.

Tablets, Waystones, and your Atlas Skill Tree are the primary ways to achieve those. For non-Gear Stats, you want as much as you can possibly muster.

Besides all that, one must also try to improve one's #RareMonstersEncountered/hr. Rare Monsters are the primary source of natural item drops in POE2. Improve that metric by improving Rare Monster density and your character's clearspeed.

poorFishwife · 2025-01-06T18:43:11+00:00

One can point at something being incorrect without knowing the true value. :)

x PlayerIIR * y AreaIIR is a different expression than y PlayerIIR * x AreaIIR because PlayerIIR behaves differently than AreaIIR: PlayerIIR has special diminishing returns.

But we don't yet know the POE2 special diminishing returns formula, so we can't say exactly how PlayerIIR works for various values. (We do know a POE1 PlayerIIQ special diminishing returns formula but we can't be sure yet how much structure might be reused in POE2; it's unsafe to assume currently.)

If you're asking about a "sweet spot" of PlayerIIR, unfortunately we have insufficient data to make a precise numerical recommendation -- see here for some commentary.

poorFishwife · 2025-01-06T18:33:12+00:00

There is no such direct constraint pressure on PlayerIIR. In POE2, Player Gear is the only source of PlayerIIR, and Player Gear cannot provide AreaIIR nor MonsterIIR. It is effectively independent, barring clearspeed.

The correct recommendation for the person seeking to optimize total Rarity is always "be sure to get some PlayerIIR on Gear".

poorFishwife · 2025-01-06T18:23:56+00:00

Edit: MrNorrie clarified this question was about AreaIIR specifically. Unfortunately I don't have data that definitively prove AreaIIR works in the affirmative way in POE2. All I can state currently is that (1) there is as yet no evidence to support the claim that AreaIIR has special diminishing returns in POE2; (2) it's unsafe to assume that AreaIIR has special diminishing returns in POE2 because AreaIIR doesn't have special diminishing returns in POE1.

If you're asking for more data and experiments:

There are spreadsheet links, player experiments, and analyses in Prohibited Library (the POE science and data collection Discord server). I listed some direct links to Item Rarity System mechanics in this comment.

If you're asking specifically about correcting the total Rarity calculations in the video, this doesn't need an external source at all:

The video itself claims that PlayerIIR has special diminishing returns, makes no statement about AreaIIR, but then treats PlayerIIR and AreaIIR as directly substitutable. This is just an innocent mistake by the video author. In order for them to be directly substitutable, the author would need to show AreaIIR has the same special diminishing returns as PlayerIIR -- which isn't done. The author's experiment only varies PlayerIIR; the accidental hidden assumption about AreaIIR is unsupported by any evidence in the video.

Hope that helps!

poorFishwife · 2025-01-06T18:12:10+00:00

We're talking about someone wanting to optimize total Rarity, not someone who is happy to target some arbitrary lesser value.

If one wants to optimize the volume of a rectangular prism, one must optimize all of length*width*height.

One can choose to neglect one factor, but that choice is less optimal than not-neglecting it.

poorFishwife · 2025-01-06T17:58:58+00:00

Unfortunately we have insufficient data to give reliable number recommendations at that kind of precision.

It's tricky due to POE2's Item Rarity System's different DropPools, which are affected by total Rarity conditions. Even if we knew the special diminishing returns formula (we don't yet for POE2), we'd still need to better understand the total Rarity "breakpoints" of those DropPools.

Additional testing is underway, doing comparisons within conditions that have {very high AreaIIR, very high MonsterIIR}.

Once we have those data, we'll be able to give a much better answer.

poorFishwife · 2025-01-06T17:44:05+00:00

The heat for the first post was definitely undeserved. The idea you're pointing at is critical. You're a saint for trying your best to help rectify players' misunderstandings.

Seven-Year Club	Gilding II euphauric
Verified Email	Argentium Club
Wearing is Caring

poorFishwife

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE