Just found an 8 Weaver’s Will item in a 300+ Corruption Echo. Didn’t the devs say this new item class can have up to 28 Weavers Will, and that the chance to drop higher values increases with difficulty? How likely is it to find a <10 Weaver’s Will while farming 300+ corruption? Just curious how many low drops one will get until a good Weaver’s Will item drops.
RNG is RNG.
4 Likes
8 is 3 higher, so corruption works 
Yes but the question was “How likely is it to find a Weaver’s Will item with a decent number of affix rolls in high-corruption zones?”. 1 out of 3? 10? 100? Is this documented anywhere?
They were introduced on Thursday, no, it’s not documented anywhere.
Honestly I dont think there is anything specific anywhere but if the WW items are anything like Uniques etc then its really RNG and nothing else.
One of the often discussed things around Corruption is the scaling of drops at higher corruptions - beyond 200 corruption you may get more drops but there isnt really anything that gives you better quality uniques etc. you will potentially find more, but how they roll isnt linked to Corruption level. At least not from what I and others have experienced.
All the RNG.
Like many said, you get the same or even better drops on lower corruption a lot of the times.
If anything on higher corruptions I’m seeing more Uniques and Exalted nodes on the runs, more T7s definitely than on lower corruption and somehow better rolls on Idols. But blessings, weaver wills and rolls on uniques it’s all RNG.
I just wish people would stop referring to RNG as though it was an “omnipotent god”. IT IS NOT.
It is just ONE paramenter that is used in selecting the drop probability…and it is usually used as a seed value to “randomise” drops WITHIN A RANGE of possibilities. IT is that range which is predetermined that generally dictates the possibility and the RND adds the likelihood component to the drop parameters within that range. The range can manipulated without upsetting the RNG god.
RNG on top of RNG (etc etc) can be very disheartening and I would prefer to see it relegated to the slot machine gambling philosophy where it belongs.
RNG is a staple of the genre, you want literally everything to be deterministic?
Also, a 13 WW item can be 110x better than a 28 WW item if the 28WW rolls two defenses (poison and necro for example) with two status offenses (+% chance to frailty and +% chance to stun) – and I wouldn’t know anything about this, oh no, nothing whatsoever…
2 Likes
You cherry picked one statement about multiple levels of RNG and twisted it to reflect a view that I am opposed to all RNG. Talk about puting words on ones mouth. Sheesh.
If you read what I said, carefully, you will see that I was pointing out that RNG is only a PART of the drop probability and that how the RNG seed is manipulated by whatever algorithms are used is what determines the drop…RNG is only a part of randomising drops WITHIN A PREDETERMINED RANGE…and it is that range, and how the parameters are manipulated that determines the drop. For example, how do you think the Glyph of Hope works???if it is all RNG. It modifies the algorithm. It is the algorithm that manages the probability. People focusing solely on RNG (usually a seed value between 0 and 1) are totally missing the point. And it is convenient to promote this mythology…the “magical black box” makes the decisions…NOT.
My reference to my personal RNG preference is refering to multiple layers of RNG on RNG on RNG on RNG (etc). Used in a properly risk assessed and considered way, RNG is a must. At no stage did I indicate that all RNG should be eliminated.
1 Like
Wow man, pretty lame statement considering what was written. I’d take the time to read things completely before responding in the future. But you do you.
I didnt twist or put words in your mouth in any way, I asked you a question. Almost every facet of the majority of games in the genre are dictated rng. Its rng what drops, its then rng what affixes it gets, then one more layer of rng to determine what tier that affix is. Want to break an item? Rng as to what affixes you get back. I know you are very intelligent, perhaps I misunderstood your point. I have a small hole in my cerebellum, it happens quite often 
Your question was meant to throw a false perception at what he was saying. Just stop.
My question was as plain and simple as it read. Thank you for playing interpreter for us though.
No problem. Your question still lacks any real substance.
Just as much as your wannabe moderation.
Having been a systems analyst and systems auditor for over 30 years, I get used to spurious irrelevant arguments/questions trying to deflect people from the real issues. My personal preference is irrelevant to the issue…making irrelevant “noise” about it says more about you than me.
What part of me telling you I have a hole in my cerebellum dont you get? Strokes kind of suck. You are a very intelligent person and there were a lot of concepts going on in your message, I missed your point obviously. It is hard for sometimes to understand things now, just like ward topic I just made. You act like I was taking a shot at you, my question was completely benign. “Making irrelevant noise?” Its not that deep.
3 Likes