Guild Wars 2

Khisanth.2948:

Xbon.9086:

ZudetGambeous.9573:

MF works great. If Vol comes around he can show you the numbers.

Remember MF does NOT affect chests. You can not use MF in dungeons because you literally only kill like 4 things in dungeons. MF only affects PvP loot boxes and open world drops. If you farm an event with 100+ mobs with 0% MF and then again with 500% MF you will notice the difference.

on the wiki it says sPvP loot boxes are NOT affected by Magic Find, where did you see that they were?

The boxes from the new tracks that you can complete. Source is from various dev posts such as https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/pvp/pvp/Magic-Find-PvP-Mystery-Chest/3875950

ok, thank you. the wiki has misinformation then.

serapheles.5409:

My own anecdote for this topic is I’ve definitely noticed better drops as I rose my magic find, most noticeably around 100% MF. Most noticeably, I feel like I get more drops, and that I get a better ratio of whites to blues or greens than before (from mobs). I’m not certain how it has affected my rares or exotics, but I feel that it has somewhat increased the frequency I get rares. I don’t really notice a difference when using a MF booster or MF food, but I do feel like Birthday Boosters further help those points.

Something occurred to me as I was reading this post.

You feel like your drops have improved as your MF rose, and that bday boosters help a lot more than regular boosters or food. While it’s true that drop rates will, overall, improve with higher MF, it isn’t necessarily going to be a noticeable difference. I suspect that most of what you’re observing is confirmation bias: you expect more drops due to high MF, so you pay more attention to the good drops you’re getting. (Not saying this is definitely the case or that it explains everything 100%, just that it’s a likely factor.)

What occurred to me is that this might explain why the OP feels like 130% MF is more effective than 300% MF: at 130% MF, they expect to see slightly better drops, but they’re not expecting miracles, so they feel satisfied with the ordinary loot they’re getting. At MAXED-OUT 300% MF, on the other hand, they feel like they should be getting the best loot possible, so they’ll end up getting frustrated when their loot continues to be ordinary.

This makes me wonder if the way MF is worded is having an effect on the way people think about drop rates. If MF was described as an addition (e.g. +0.03%) rather than a multiplication (e.g. x300%) to drop rates, would it make people feel better? I’m not sure it would, but I don’t know, maybe it could help.

Xbon.9086:

ok, thank you. the wiki has misinformation then.

No, the wiki simply has not been updated yet. Wikis are generally player managed, so when information is rendered incorrect by changes in an update, it can take days or weeks (sometimes months) before that information is updated.

Alex.3907:

This makes me wonder if the way MF is worded is having an effect on the way people think about drop rates. If MF was described as an addition (e.g. +0.03%) rather than a multiplication (e.g. x300%) to drop rates, would it make people feel better? I’m not sure it would, but I don’t know, maybe it could help.

It wouldnt. People see “+300% MF” and read it as “+300% loot dropped” and get kittened off when it’s not true.

Aidan Savage.2078:

Alex.3907:

This makes me wonder if the way MF is worded is having an effect on the way people think about drop rates. If MF was described as an addition (e.g. +0.03%) rather than a multiplication (e.g. x300%) to drop rates, would it make people feel better? I’m not sure it would, but I don’t know, maybe it could help.

It wouldnt. People see “+300% MF” and read it as “+300% loot dropped” and get kittened off when it’s not true.

That’s exactly my point — wording it as “300%” gives people unrealistic expectations, because 300 is a big number, so they feel like it must have a big effect. What I’m wondering is if using a smaller-looking number would encourage more realistic expectations.

it works but even though you see you have 300% don’t let those big numbers fool you every 100% you have = 1 roll so say for an example out of 40 rolls with 300% you only have 4 of 40 instead of 1 out of 40 chance to get something I also read and sure its still in play the more magic find you have the higher chance to get the grey items as well so you don’t hit diminishing returns on a hand full of greens and blues http://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Diminishing_returns so from what your saying you hit diminishing returns already and not going around it and just making it worse farming the same dung over and over you’ll get less and less farm different dungs,maps,monsters ect to get the best payout for the day hope this helps

SRG.3607:

You have to understand that, despite what devs are saying, the RNG loot system is buggued in GW2 : there are lucky accounts and unlucky accounts. Magic Find is just added to this base fact, lucky accounts will be even more lucky, unlucky accounts won’t see any differences.

Wow, people are still trying to spread this old rumor? That’s some perseverance. Must use quality tin foil for the hats, for it not to be erroded yet.

Elidath.5679:

SRG.3607:

You have to understand that, despite what devs are saying, the RNG loot system is buggued in GW2 : there are lucky accounts and unlucky accounts. Magic Find is just added to this base fact, lucky accounts will be even more lucky, unlucky accounts won’t see any differences.

Wow, people are still trying to spread this old rumor? That’s some perseverance. Must use quality tin foil for the hats, for it not to be erroded yet.

I think with the use of DR still in the game to this day, and with the use of DPS based rewards that it’s not simply a rumor but an experience by many in the community. “The more they overthink the plumbing, the easier it is to stop up the drain.”

I think they’ve put entirely too much into the equation in an attempt (like all game developers do) to control the economy in the TP and they’ve put way too many negative variables into it causing this to be a common experience. Just because you don’t experience it doesn’t mean it doesn’t happen. I happen to know that there are accounts out there that still to this day haven’t received a single rare outside of the 1 permitted daily that happens with certain bosses yet they participate weekly in the same events as everyone else does in their groups and guilds. That says something right there about their system.

Antonio Cappello.1806:

tigirius.9014:

“It’s RNG deal with it” is no longer a valid argument. It’s well known that mathematically speaking complete and utter randomness is impossible, it is also a well known fact that the typical algorithms used by all mmo companies are skewed. So that being said let’s look at the problem.

Mathematically speaking, complete and utter randomness is quite possible, so I’m not sure what you’re talking about there..

I’ve talked about this with a phd mathematician, in order for a number to be truly random the upper bound would have to be infinity and so the average size of a truly random number is one half infinity and so no computer system will ever be able to use truly random numbers.

FWIW this guy did work on RNG algorithms for industry and he said they don’t really want something approximating real randomness because they don’t like long stretches of unlikely events. He said what industry is in the market for is an algorithm with few long stretches of repeating results but overall is close to random and that’s what he had to program to please the customer.

tigirius.9014:

Just because you don’t experience it doesn’t mean it doesn’t happen. I happen to know that there are accounts out there that still to this day haven’t received a single rare outside of the 1 permitted daily that happens with certain bosses yet they participate weekly in the same events as everyone else does in their groups and guilds. That says something right there about their system.

I honestly don’t see how this can’t be explained by ordinary randomness.

I’m not saying there definitely isn’t an issue with drop rates, but you’re going to need to conjure up better evidence than that to prove it.

MotherKitten.6795:

FWIW this guy did work on RNG algorithms for industry and he said they don’t really want something approximating real randomness because they don’t like long stretches of unlikely events. He said what industry is in the market for is an algorithm with few long stretches of repeating results but overall is close to random and that’s what he had to program to please the customer.

Heh, so what you’re saying is that playfuldreamer’s idea for a “random pattern” RNG is already what we’ve got?

Many experienced players streamline the content they play for making gold by doing content that magic find doesn’t affect.

Illusion of choice.

Oniyui.8279:

Many experienced players streamline the content they play for making gold by doing content that magic find doesn’t affect.

I do this already now by looking in the TP for items I know will sell well before starting my farming that day and then gathering from areas I know will sell well enough to make a good profit however, there is still the issue of too much RNG on bags for example that causes a problem for crafters for which there is no work around with the ever depleting methods of grinding out gold for expensive items to craft with such as lodestones, and things like cloth/leather. What’s bad is it’s doubly random for these crafting bags so it’s even worse even if one buys them with laurels there’s a chance it won’t drop anything you can use much less sell in order to afford another item you can use.

Alex.3907:

This makes me wonder if the way MF is worded is having an effect on the way people think about drop rates. If MF was described as an addition (e.g. +0.03%) rather than a multiplication (e.g. x300%) to drop rates, would it make people feel better? I’m not sure it would, but I don’t know, maybe it could help.

That doesn’t work very well.
+0.03% is awesome on something with a base rate of 0.001%
x300% not so much

On the other hand +0.03% on something with a base rate of 10% is hardly worth caring about but x300% would be great.

Khisanth.2948:

That doesn’t work very well.
+0.03% is awesome on something with a base rate of 0.001%
x300% not so much

On the other hand +0.03% on something with a base rate of 10% is hardly worth caring about but x300% would be great.

Oh, I was just using hypothetical numbers to explain my point, I have no idea if 0.0001% or 0.03% or whatever are the correct stat for base drop rates!

Alex.3907:

Khisanth.2948:

That doesn’t work very well.
+0.03% is awesome on something with a base rate of 0.001%
x300% not so much

On the other hand +0.03% on something with a base rate of 10% is hardly worth caring about but x300% would be great.

Oh, I was just using hypothetical numbers to explain my point, I have no idea if 0.0001% or 0.03% or whatever are the correct stat for base drop rates!

That isn’t really the point.
The point is that a multiplier works with both high and low base rates but adding a flat rate will be incredible for some things and completely useless for others.

MotherKitten.6795:

I’ve talked about this with a phd mathematician, in order for a number to be truly random the upper bound would have to be infinity and so the average size of a truly random number is one half infinity and so no computer system will ever be able to use truly random numbers.

FWIW this guy did work on RNG algorithms for industry and he said they don’t really want something approximating real randomness because they don’t like long stretches of unlikely events. He said what industry is in the market for is an algorithm with few long stretches of repeating results but overall is close to random and that’s what he had to program to please the customer.

The argument being made by that poster was that mathematically there are no truly random numbers. That’s wrong, however. What you’re speaking of is a technical restriction, which is a different ballgame altogether.

Yes, for true randomness a random real variable must have infinite range. This is obviously not achievable from a technical standpoint. Then again, the principle of RNG isn’t really realizable on a classical computer anyways, since it relies on a seed (pseudo-random instead of random). The point also still remains that for all intents and purposes, and over any appreciable time scales, a good pseudo-RNG system is statistically very close to a true RNG system.

Khisanth.2948:

That isn’t really the point.
The point is that a multiplier works with both high and low base rates but adding a flat rate will be incredible for some things and completely useless for others.

Oh, whoops. ^^;

Yeah, that’s a good point.

Erus Keb.8379:

I just wanted to ask VOL… if your eyes bleed much? LOL That’s a crazy amount of goodies in your bank.

Funny I haven’t updated it in awhile. You should see it now lol.

Vol.7601:

Erus Keb.8379:

I just wanted to ask VOL… if your eyes bleed much? LOL That’s a crazy amount of goodies in your bank.

Funny I haven’t updated it in awhile. You should see it now lol.

http://imgur.com/a/yJjU5

Antonio Cappello.1806:

I’m also dubious about your claims that DPS or group size contribute to drop rates.

technically, they do it indirectly – by helping with tagging. Now, once you tagged the mob, however, the drop chances are exactly the same and dps or group stops having any effect at all.

MotherKitten.6795:

I’ve talked about this with a phd mathematician, in order for a number to be truly random the upper bound would have to be infinity and so the average size of a truly random number is one half infinity and so no computer system will ever be able to use truly random numbers.

Erm, sorry, lolnope. There is a difference between a random real number (which is what the matematician has been talking about) and a random number drawn from a range of discrete values (when you throw a coin you don’t have any infinity there, only two possibilities exist). Both can be equally truly random however.

There is indeed a reason why we call computer generated random values pseudorandom, but it has absolutely nothing with your cited explanation. It is a result of computers doing everything according to an algorithm – thus it cannot be really random, it can at best give a good approximation of it. On the other hand, the quality of computer pseudorandom generators nowadays is good enough that human mind is not able to grasp the patterns in the result. It can only perceive patterns that are not really there.

Edit: come to think, your mathematician friend might have been saying that for a pseudorandom generator to produce true random numbers, the seed would have to be infinite. This is actually correct – still doesn’t change anything though.

Antonio Cappello.1806:

I’m also dubious about your claims that DPS or group size contribute to drop rates. Again, I would like to see a set of controlled trials (at least a few thousand to ensure statistical accuracy) that could support this. Before you suggest I go looking these threads up myself, I’ll point out that the burden of proof is on you; you’re making the claims, so you need to provide the evidence.

This simple point in your message show that you’re really unaware of how loot works in the game.

To be clear : yes, DPS has a real impact of loot.

I’m doing several times each weeks zerg world boss, for example Melandru (100+ players). On champions, if you’re not grouped, with a zerk warrior, hitting the champion as much as you can with your best skills, you have 0 loot (no chests, nothing at all).
If you are in a group, you always get your loot (champion’s chest).
Every time we run the bus there are complaints in the channel “why no loot for me ?”, from people not in a group (and we have to explain to them that they have to be in a group to get their loot). So yes it is totally obvious based on this situation repeted over and over that DPS (and being grouped or not) impact loot. It’s the same with a low level character on a level 80 champion : you won’t loot anything ‘cause you’re not doing enough damage.

That’s why so many of players are saying that loot doesn’t work as expected, as clearly shown by tyrius a few messages above, there are way more parameters affecting loot than just a “roll a dice on the loot table” : magic find, DPS, number of players around, maybe even network considerations, diminushing returns, and so on. On ANet side, the algorithm is nothing like a simple if statement with a random value, it’s a more complicated algorithm which allows a lot of pitfalls.

Having played a lot this game for a long time, i’m pretty certain that something is weird in this game about loot : some players are always looting a lot of stuff (golds, exos, precursors, aso), whereas some other never loot anything, even when doing the same events over and over with the lucky players.

In the long term, this can’t be just RNG.

playfuldreamer.1920:

Alex.3907:

This is honestly just how RNG works: sometimes you get a lucky streak, sometimes you get a really unlucky one. Magic find, as Hannelore said, is only going to help a little bit when it comes to really rare things like precursors, because 300% is only going to take you from 0.0001% to 0.0004%. That sort of difference isn’t going to make a noticeable change in your ultra-rare drops at all.

Ok I Did It’s friend was just super lucky to get two precursors within such a short time. Was it a one in a billion chance that would happen? Of course it was. But that doesn’t mean it could never happen! Look at it this way: thousands if not millions of drops are getting generated every day. If a precursor has a one in a billion chance of dropping, then you’d expect one to drop somewhere in the world once every couple of days. So one random player is guaranteed to get a precursor drop every few days — there’s just no guarantee who.

If you still believe MF is bugged at higher levels, run an experiment: one person with 300% MF and one person with 130% MF go out and kill the same set of mobs a few thousand (yes, a few thousand, MINIMUM) times, and both write down everything that drops. If the numbers don’t look right, send your findings to ANet in a bug report.

Noticeable streaks are a sign of bad RNG.

There’s evidence that to save on processing power ANet uses precomputed “random-like” tables or a simple feedback algorithm and not a good RNG.

Astralporing.1957:

technically, they do it indirectly – by helping with tagging. Now, once you tagged the mob, however, the drop chances are exactly the same and dps or group stops having any effect at all.

Ah, true. As you say though, once the mob is tagged, it’s all the same. I’m sure there’s some optimal number of participants and dps that maximizes number of mobs successfully tagged with minimum effort, but as you say, that’s not really the RNG system that’s causing the issue, per se.

Astralporing.1957:

Edit: come to think, your mathematician friend might have been saying that for a pseudorandom generator to produce true random numbers, the seed would have to be infinite. This is actually correct – still doesn’t change anything though.

If that’s what his mathematician friend was getting at, that would indeed make more sense. I think it would be great if probabilities and some of the basic concepts of random numbers could be treated more often in secondary school education. Where I’m from it’s not common, but it’s such a useful topic.

SRG.3607:

I’m doing several times each weeks zerg world boss, for example Melandru (100+ players). On champions, if you’re not grouped, with a zerk warrior, hitting the champion as much as you can with your best skills, you have 0 loot (no chests, nothing at all).
If you are in a group, you always get your loot (champion’s chest).

If you want to toss around anecdotal evidence like it means something, I’ll do the same and point out that I run champion trains solo quite often, and I’ve never missed out on loot provided I managed to tag the mob. Sure, tagging requires doing enough damage to remove some percentage of the mob’s health, but once tagged, loot no longer depends on DPS.

I have never experienced this issue you speak of; nor has anyone else I know. Without some real non-anecdotal evidence supporting this particular claim, I see no reason to accept your anecdote over mine.

EDIT: Also, in the long term this can certainly be RNG, and it probably is. Not many people win the lottery either, but one could argue that the ones that do are exceptionally lucky. Some people even win more than once. That doesn’t make the lottery any less random.

Look at the tables like this

First Set of RNG

50% No Drop
30% Junk Item
20% Container
10% Item

Next set (off container)

90% previous lower tier of level area (example tier 5)
10% current tier of level area (example tier 6)

Next set (off item)

50% crafting item
30% armor
20% weapon

Next set (off crafting item)

90% previous lower tier (ex tier 5)
10% current tier (ex tier 6)

next set (off lower tier)

95% blue quality
5% rare quality

next set (current tier)

95% blue quality
5% rare quality

next set (off armor)

33% light
33% medium
33% heavy

next set (off light)

15% head
15% shoulder
15% chest
15% glove
15% pants
15% boots

next set (off head)

70% blue
25% green
4% rare
1% exotic

these are examples. they do not all add to 100% but im giving a prime example. the percentages are not what they really are, but you can base your mf to improve in that fashion. you have to roll lucky through ALL those generics in order to get your exotic. and your chances of getting 1 in an hour is the same as getting 2 in an hour. its just whether the numbers roll good for you or not. there is no “lucky or unlucky” accounts. its called chance for a reason, that’s why you shouldn’t gamble if you cant cheat or don’t know the outcome.

Hannelore.8153:

playfuldreamer.1920:

Alex.3907:

This is honestly just how RNG works: sometimes you get a lucky streak, sometimes you get a really unlucky one. Magic find, as Hannelore said, is only going to help a little bit when it comes to really rare things like precursors, because 300% is only going to take you from 0.0001% to 0.0004%. That sort of difference isn’t going to make a noticeable change in your ultra-rare drops at all.

Ok I Did It’s friend was just super lucky to get two precursors within such a short time. Was it a one in a billion chance that would happen? Of course it was. But that doesn’t mean it could never happen! Look at it this way: thousands if not millions of drops are getting generated every day. If a precursor has a one in a billion chance of dropping, then you’d expect one to drop somewhere in the world once every couple of days. So one random player is guaranteed to get a precursor drop every few days — there’s just no guarantee who.

If you still believe MF is bugged at higher levels, run an experiment: one person with 300% MF and one person with 130% MF go out and kill the same set of mobs a few thousand (yes, a few thousand, MINIMUM) times, and both write down everything that drops. If the numbers don’t look right, send your findings to ANet in a bug report.

Noticeable streaks are a sign of bad RNG.

There’s evidence that to save on processing power ANet uses precomputed “random-like” tables or a simple feedback algorithm and not a good RNG.

That’s what I’m seeing as well. That the same people in the same guilds doing the same weekly, daily events are getting the same result. If we were to believe that everyone had a standard chance at these items then we wouldn’t see trends like this, there would be more variation between the same groups on what and how often they’d receive a drop. But what we’re seeing is the same set of people getting the highest drops doing the same things, that to me means something is still wrong here and something must be done.

Most of the problem however stems from they type of rewards we are seeing from doing typical events in game not related to killing. It’s been said and I agree that if they improved the items we received from say completing a map, that this problem with the lopsided loot system would no longer be that much of an issue.

It’s the same for crafting, if they would just make it a bit easier to get certain crafting materials than we wouldn’t have the problems that allowing only a certain percentage of the population to control the prices on said items to even do something as simple as leveling from 400 to 500 in crafting. DR is a terrible system it always has been.

Vol.7601:

Vol.7601:

Erus Keb.8379:

I just wanted to ask VOL… if your eyes bleed much? LOL That’s a crazy amount of goodies in your bank.

Funny I haven’t updated it in awhile. You should see it now lol.

http://imgur.com/a/yJjU5

I can haz o-o?

Vol.7601:

Look at sig. MF works. I have a huge sample size.

Sorry Vol, but, that siggy(Magic find works: http://sinasdf.imgur.com/) DOESN’T MEAN SQUAT, only that you are one of the select few with a very lucky account.

Im Mudbone.1437:

Vol.7601:

Look at sig. MF works. I have a huge sample size.

Sorry Vol, but, that siggy(Magic find works: http://sinasdf.imgur.com/) DOESN’T MEAN SQUAT, only that you are one of the select few with a very lucky account.

Conspiracy theories dont belong on a game forum. Door is this way →

Also, luck doesnt mean anything in this game as far as drops. People only remember the really good drops, and remember the total crap they get handed. They dont remember, or willingly overlook, everything in the middle. Just like you only remember the few bad restaurant experiences you’ve had in the last decade as opposed to the other 99.9999999999999999999999999999999999999999% experiences that were not notable in any other way than they were decent enough.

Second, what’s to not say Vol isnt hoarding all his good drops that he’s accumulated since the game started? Those images could (and probably are) the product of playing a game for a couple years.

Aidan Savage.2078:

Im Mudbone.1437:

Vol.7601:

Look at sig. MF works. I have a huge sample size.

Sorry Vol, but, that siggy(Magic find works: http://sinasdf.imgur.com/) DOESN’T MEAN SQUAT, only that you are one of the select few with a very lucky account.

Conspiracy theories dont belong on a game forum. Door is this way ->

Also, luck doesnt mean anything in this game as far as drops. People only remember the really good drops, and remember the total crap they get handed. They dont remember, or willingly overlook, everything in the middle. Just like you only remember the few bad restaurant experiences you’ve had in the last decade as opposed to the other 99.9999999999999999999999999999999999999999% experiences that were not notable in any other way than they were decent enough.

Second, what’s to not say Vol isnt hoarding all his good drops that he’s accumulated since the game started? Those images could (and probably are) the product of playing a game for a couple years.

So, what your saying is it’s impossible? I have NEVER eaten at a restaurant that wasn’t excellent because I know who I can trust when it comes to good food, unlike games. Be ignorant of conspiracies if you want, but, this wouldn’t be the first to be proven true. Exit stage left.

Im Mudbone.1437:

Vol.7601:

Look at sig. MF works. I have a huge sample size.

Sorry Vol, but, that siggy(Magic find works: http://sinasdf.imgur.com/) DOESN’T MEAN SQUAT, only that you are one of the select few with a very lucky account.

Then present equally comprehensive data for a different account. I am sure, that since you are so certain you know what is really happening, you do have such data, right?
If you don’t have any data to back up your claims, you might as well insist that all your precursors were stolen from drop tables by Martians.

Astralporing.1957:

Im Mudbone.1437:

Vol.7601:

Look at sig. MF works. I have a huge sample size.

Sorry Vol, but, that siggy(Magic find works: http://sinasdf.imgur.com/) DOESN’T MEAN SQUAT, only that you are one of the select few with a very lucky account.

Then present equally comprehensive data for a different account. I am sure, that since you are so certain you know what is really happening, you do have such data, right?
If you don’t have any data to back up your claims, you might as well insist that all your precursors were stolen from drop tables by Martians.

It’s much easier to present proof of getting many drops than not getting any. Maybe a 24hour livestream(if it’s not recorded people will just claim that the drops were edited out) but who is willing to sit through all that and is that even a big enough sample size?

So then, just me saying or even snatching screeny is good enough? Then neither could his/hers pics be viewed as legit being that everything could be EDITED IN as well as out so that analogy don’t fly.

Antonio Cappello.1806:

playfuldreamer.1920:

Noticeable streaks are a sign of bad RNG.

That’s not entirely correct. Noticeable streaks at the statistical level are a sign that there’s some trend that isn’t random. Noticeable streaks on smaller scales happen all the time and are a natural result of RNG. If you flip a coin ten times and get ten heads, that doesn’t mean the process isn’t random or that it’s biased.

This.
It’s really too bad we don’t have the percentages. But let’s take the coin flip toss example. The percentage to hit 10 coin flips out of ten tries is 0.097656%. So the odds is 1023 to 1… This can be found by using the “cumulative binomial probability” formula. There are free calculators online.

The great thing about RNG from a developer standpoint is that there is no way to tell if it is working as intended or not.

Rynn.1324:

The great thing about RNG from a developer standpoint is that there is no way to tell if it is working as intended or not.

Only because we don’t know developer intentions. When things really break, we do learn about it very fast – it’s just hard to see that over the deluge of “omg, saw i precursor drop for someone else twice, my account must be flagged for unluck” and “got 1 ecto from 5 rares, ecto drop rates nerfed again” type posts.
Whether devs listen to that is another matter, of course.

Magic Find only works on drops from mobs, nothing else. I do find that with increasing MF, I get more rares and exotics.

I wish they would make an MMO with a loot system that felt exciting like Diablo or Torchlight 2.

Magic Find does not increase your chances of rare items. It increases the chances for an item to be of a higher quality when dropped.

This means that if you were going to get a Basic quality drop, you may get a Fine drop instead, if you were going to get a Fine item it may be Masterwork instead.

And the higher the rarity, the less MF works, that’s why you won’t get noticably more rares.

So if you are getting lots of masterwork and fine as not as many Basic items, MF is definitely working for you.

I short: MF sucks, it doesn’t really do what people may expect of it, it’s mostly placebo and it was a waste of stats when it was in gear.

MithranArkanere.8957:

And the higher the rarity, the less MF works, that’s why you won’t get noticably more rares.

On what information you are basing your assumption on? Because it should actually work exactly opposite – be more effective on the highest tiers (due to cumulative increase of chances for upgrade from tier to tier).
I do agree that shortterm MF is mostly a placebo. You need to farm a lot for it to overcome normal RNG variance, and you should not expect for it to visibly affect any short term drops (like a single dungeon run or single farm event, for example). Longterm however it does work and is noticeable (even if it’s harder to see now due to gradual increase).