"Perfect" Item Ads

a week ago there was an upped

Skin of the Vipermagi taged as perfect for sale.
Stats where like Def 836/1034, AR 35/35 and MDR 12/13

I completely disagree, and I find it annoying to have to “browse” through offers this way. It just wastes my time, even though the tag is actually supposed to save time by using filters.

What do you guys think about this one?

Edit: it´s still listed and Stats are Def 930/1034, AR 35/35 and MDR 12/13

Alsadius wrote: 1 day ago

IMO, you should only list it as perfect if all the relevant rolls are perfect.

That's exactly the problem - nobody agrees on what the relevant rolls are. The more rolls an item has, the bigger the dissent is. You can just read this very thread, there are several different ideas presented in here, and some people got very defensive about it. Everyone has different ideas. No matter what you think it should be, there will be a multitude of people disagreeing with you. Who defines what perfect means for every item that exists in the game?

The person who made this site deliberately defined the tag to mean "'perfect or near perfect'", precisely for the reason that there is so many opinions on it.

You (as in all of the users of this site, not just you personally) will never be able to reach an agreement on this matter. There is no one answer that everyone will be happy with.

I wonder what percentage of people using the trading section of .io actually use tags at all. They are not particularly newcomer-friendly, and I would wager that even a large proportion of long-time users do not use them.

So we are already talking about a subset of traders, and the complaint is then that some members of that subset are using a subjective tag incorrectly. But it has been pointed out many times over the years that a single “perfect” tag cannot cover every possible interpretation of perfection.

We could possibly introduce categories such as “build-perfect”, “trade-perfect”, and “collector-perfect”.
An Infinity might be considered build-perfect at -55% enemy lightning resistance in a normal base, or at 325% enhanced damage in an elite base. A 325/-55 Infinity might be called trade-perfect, while a collector-perfect version could require 340% enhanced damage, -55% enemy lightning resistance, 3 attack rating (but not 15% max durability? Already problematic). The categories would quickly become complicated and open to further disagreement. And you are back to square one.

And here's my subjective 2 cents. Diablo2.io is primarily a community site with up-to-date game information, with trading attached. It is not primarily a highly structured item marketplace even though some of us will use it as such. If someone wants to search specifically for 100% items, perfect runeword rolls and perfect bases, whatever “perfect base” means for each particular build or collector, they will probably have better results on Traderie or the-other-site.

Sorry my 2 cents but i think there's just not a high enough trade volume on this site for this to be a meaningful issue :S also agree that the search function on this site is not really suited for people looking for hyperspecific rolls / collectors and the like

Pitach wrote: 1 day ago

...
I bet the items you collect are basic non value all stats perfect items.
Just an assumption that does not help the discussion, imo. You don't know me, you know?
People talk about perfect from trading point of view and not collectors point of view.
All people? Me not. I am one of "those people" and reading the other posts here, I am not the only one who does not share your opinion.
You speak for a very low percentage of players, not for the vast majority.
Yep, most probably so. But if you read my posts carefully you'll see that I never claimed otherwise, quite the opposite.
Also, I don't think you have an idea what you talking about perfect griffons on deff, it's value is above 60

Jah currently, not to talk about a perfect tyraels with deff resists and strength, a perfect Last Wish in perfect base with ar, or so on.
In my opinion you only seek attention, once again people talk from trading point of view not collectors point of view, otherwise nobody would be selling anything.
Assumptions again that do not help, see above.
Show me you have a single item worth over 40-50

Jah, or show me that you have 200-300

Jah cash, then you gain my respect otherwise you just seek attention.
Just as much as I fail to see how not having "200-300

Jah cash" makes my point invalid, I fail to understand what your motivation for all your latent aggressive assumptions may be. I could only make assumptions about that, which........................................................I won't...

Look, I get it that you do not share my point of view and that is fine. But reading the posts here I see more than half of the contributors agreeing that the current system is flawed.
Even if the "Perfect Roll" button is by this very site allowed to be used for "Almost Perfect" items as Shadowheart pointed out, this is a crutch at best, and no good one, as it does not take into account what the word "Perfect" implies linguistically and leeds to false (and in the end disappointed) expectations.

klmklm27 wrote: 1 day ago

its missing a "near perfect" option
...

Exactly. That would be the solution to all problems in my opinion.
Just another button for all the items that do not have every stat on max. Where people can still find an item that has the relevant stats for their build in "perfect" condition, like the aforementioned Griffons with -20/+15 but low Def although it is not "perfect" in a linguistical or collectors view.

@Flyhorse: The

Wolfhowl-Example
You are right of course. 8 variable stats. I had a quick look at Arreat's site and saw 9 stats that had "varies" in brackets at the end and failed to see that two of them belong together, my bad.

mikelessar wrote: 1 day ago

Linguistically, the definition of perfect is very easy. Perfect means the best possible rolls for the item. The item could not have rolled any better, 100% the best in every possible way. An adjective that is a superlative in its base form. So there is only perfect and not "more perfect" or "the most perfect".

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/perfect
...

That

AardvarksAdvance wrote: 1 day ago

Perhaps we should have a ‘max rolls’ (nothing to do with the website that is a very helpful source of knowledge!) button which when clicked allows you to specify the number?
So if you have an item with 5 variable stats, and it rolls 4 max rolls, you can click to indicate 4 max rolls. That way you’re not claiming perfection but you are helping collectors traders buyers to quickly sort average rolled items from your item with some max rolls?
...

I like that idea.

ShadowHeart wrote: 1 day ago

I would support this if the site had granular & searchable stats for listed items - but it doesn’t (not yet anyway). Searching for specific rolls is already hard (having to manually scan through search results and evaluate what the description means - and not everyone uses the same text format nor does everyone even list all rolls). At least the ‘Perfect’ tag offers some additional filtering, even if a lot of users don’t follow your own personal idea of what ‘Perfect’ means. I.e., it’s a compromise, at least for now.

Agreed. Better imo to have an imperfect "Perfect Roll" button than nothing. Better still to have a "Perfect Roll" button for everything that is really perfect with every stat on max and a second button called "Almost Perfect" or "High Rolls" for all the other near perfect items.

Alsadius wrote: 1 day ago

IMO, you should only list it as perfect if all the relevant rolls are perfect. Like, if you have a Spirit that rolls 35% FCR and 8 magic absorb, then I'll be okay with you calling it perfect even if the mana roll is low. Or if it's a

Targe with 45% resist all, and you give it 35% FCR, then I'd even forgive a bad absorb roll as well.

But if you roll perfect mana and the others are both bad, and you try to list that as perfect, then you can screw off. One stat perfect doesn't make an item perfect, unless that's the only stat that matters.

Problem is, who decides which stats matter? I think this is the point that Pitach also shoots at.
For many people, and there Pitach is correct, only the "build-relevant" stats matter. Griffon's with -20/+15, but 227 Defense will be called "Perfect" by many because Defense is not a relevant stat in their book. Collectors and those who want to maximize each and every item on their one beloved main character will probably very happily disagree.

ShadowHeart wrote: 1 day ago

...
The person who made this site deliberately defined the tag to mean "'perfect or near perfect'", precisely for the reason that there is so many opinions on it.
You (as in all of the users of this site, not just you personally) will never be able to reach an agreement on this matter. There is no one answer that everyone will be happy with.

I would not be so pessimistic about it.
Several suggestions here (klmklm27 and me with a Near Perfect button , Aards Max Roll button idea and Queegon's “build-perfect”, “trade-perfect”, and “collector-perfect”) to me at least seem to be constructive proposals that earn consideration.

Granted, I do not know the least bit of building and maintaining a site like this and how "easy" it would be to put one of those ideas into practise.
So, as said before, better like it is now than without the "Perfect Roll" button, but if it could be improved without to much of a hassle.... Why not?

Agree, it is much ado about nothing. If perfect was only used in truly perfect on all rolls items, it would be such a tiny percentage of items listed so as to be functionally non useful to 99.999% of users transacting.

Most users use it as “perfect on the most important stat roll”, which I think is the perfect way to use it.

I’ve never even seen a truly perfect on all rolls sunder on those other sites, the only listings I have seen look like they are from scammers.

I would NOT introduce a “near perfect” option, that feels subjective enough that it would no longer be easy to identify items that are perfect on the most important roll. Maybe introduce a “#%naly retentive perfect” option for some users to indicate perfect on all rolls Or an “All Roll Perfect” option.

And on many items what is the most important roll varies a lot.

Take the very variable and popular

Ars Dul'Mephistos:

- 30 fcr is great and very important for many but if you only need 25 to reach your breakpoint, that's not the most important
- enemy magic res is super important... if you use magic based attacks. A physical

Echoing Strike user cares way less.
- and ED? AR ? MF?

Most likely the full perfect will never be found before a century...

To sum up, for now, better have this than nothing. If super abusive perfects happen, report them e.g. a Spirit whose only perfect roll would be mana and fcr + mdr not even close to perfect. If close enough though, like the Vipermagi above, accepte that it is "reasonably" perfect for many users.

And enjoy the game and the site

As pointed out earlier in the thread this is not a new topic, and most of the suggested fixes (adding a near-perfect tag, individual stats listings, etc.) has been discussed in earlier threads on this exact topic (which might suggest that these discussions won't take off here).

The current "Perfect" tag seems to be designed from a "maximum utility for the maximum number of players" point of view. And I agree with this: I believe there are many more people who search for items that are perfect on a set of rolls that matter for their gameplay, than there are collectors who would care about, say, the

Battle Cry roll on Call To Arms despite never foreseeing themselves using that skill in the game.

Furthermore, I think for many (but not all, see below) collectors of the second kind it still wouldn't be much of a problem, given the few items actually listed as perfect on this site. If I search for a Perfect (any specific unique or rune word) on this site, I seldom get more than 4-5 hits, and it doesn't take much time to walk through them all and check whether they have the "perfect" stats that I care about (and the collector caring about all stats would be using the exact same strategy). If the listings are well made (so that the relevant stats are visible in the search listing and you don't have to click the post) this process is very quick.

The exception I can think of is if you are trying to collect every perfect unique, rune word etc. in the game, and you simply filter the active trades on "perfect roll" (with no or few other criteria) to look for ANY item missing in your collection: browsetrades.php?sk=t&sd=d&perfect=1

That currently gave me 566 hits, and then I clearly see the problem. A "collectors-perfect" tag would of course help these people. But then there are always the questions of interface simplicity, and getting everyone to understand the difference between the tags (which in this case is probably the more difficult part).

I think this kind of topics being brought up a few times in the past…

Anyhow, to make things less complicated, just add another tag calls “100% perfect”.m

Remove the current ‘perfect’ tag, inplace of it, add ‘near perfect’ tag instead?

I hope to god, the potential seller better know when to use the ‘100% perfect’ tag means, if not, he/she should get the trading revoked temporarily…

d2rppa69 wrote: 16 hours ago

I think this kind of topics being brought up a few times in the past…

Anyhow, to make things less complicated, just add another tag calls “100% perfect”.m

Remove the current ‘perfect’ tag, inplace of it, add ‘near perfect’ tag instead?

I hope to god, the potential seller better know when to use the ‘100% perfect’ tag means, if not, he/she should get the trading revoked temporarily…

So.... 100% on the item-specific variable rolls? Or also the base? And does the base need to be superior for RWs? And does that superior also need to be 100% across the board?

You can call it "100%" but even that isn't a reliable blanket statement free of subjective interpretation and subsequent complaints.

d2rppa69 wrote: 16 hours ago

…
Anyhow, to make things less complicated, just add another tag calls “100% perfect”.

A classical pleonasm...

Perfect is the same as 100%. That's like calling a doter senile.

Easy solution: A "perfect button" and a "almost perfect" or "high rolls" button.

Schnorki wrote: 7 hours ago

So.... 100% on the item-specific variable rolls? Or also the base? And does the base need to be superior for RWs? And does that superior also need to be 100% across the board?

You can call it "100%" but even that isn't a reliable blanket statement free of subjective interpretation and subsequent complaints.

Not necessarily.
Let's take the example of a White

Archon Plate.

In order to be called "Perfect" (with the linguistic meaning of the word "perfect" in mind - see mikelessar's earlier post) the

Archon Plate needs to have 524 Defense (and being really captious a Durability of 60).
It does not have to have the Enhanced Defense stat, because then we would not be talking about a White or "normal"

Archon Plate anymore, but about a Superior

Archon Plate, which in my book, though related, is a new class of item.
The Superior

Archon Plate on the other hand would need 15% Enhanced Defense to be called "Perfect".
So far this seems to be quite straightforward to me.

More complicated it gets when we consider runewords, I'll give you that.

Another example:

You see an ethereal

Mancatcher with the runeword Obedience in it, declared as "Perfect" here in the market place.
Obedience has two variable stats: +200-300 to Defense and +20-30% to All Resistances. The stats are 300 Defense and 30 All Res, so the trader was correct, the runeword rolled perfect. The Enhanced Damage is always a fix 370% with this runeword, as it does not roll.

Then you see another ethereal

Mancatcher with the rune Obedience in it.
Same as before: 30 All Res, 300 Defense BUT 377% Enhanced Damage. How is that? Because the Mancather base was not "normal" but superior.
Obviously the

Mancatcher base was not "perfect" as it had only 7% Enhanced Damage not 15% and also not the +3 Attack Rating (if that is possible with

Mancatcher bases, I don't know).
So, was the trader correct to flag the Obedience as perfect? In my mind yes, because all variable stats of the Obedience runeword rolled perfect.
He should point out though in the description, that the base was not perfect.

Of course it is not always this obvious with runewords.

To clarify, here another example:

You find a

Cryptic Sword with the runeword Famine flagged as perfect. Only variable stat is Enhanced Damage from 320 to 370%. Our example has 370%, so perfect, right?
In fact we do not know.
If the

Cryptic Sword base was not superior, then yes.
But it could have been a superior

Cryptic Sword with only 10% Enhanced Damage and the runeword rolled only 360% Enhanced Damage, so that neither the base nor the runeword rolled perfect.
Does it matter? If you want to keep the runeword and use it, then no. Because the outcome suggests "perfect".

Perhaps it would be a good rule of thump with runeword items to never call them perfect when you as the trader are not sure if they truly are perfect.
Or that you at least point out that though seemingly perfect you do not know what base was used, when you do not know it.

wulfen777 wrote: 5 hours ago

Perfect is the same as 100%.

Based on what playars think on this site, that is the case, otherwise we wouldnt have this discussion being brought up many times?

Usually 100% perfect, to most players, all variables and base is 100% perfect.

As the current ‘perfect’ tag, lots of player interprets as it can be 1 or more variables are perfect to be used the ‘perfect’ tag, he ce we get alot of discrepency on what ‘perfect’ tag means.

@Schnorki
Yeah if base is used as superior, it also has to be 100% perfect roll. If base is not sup, it also has to have 100% perfect roll, hence the prefix is ‘100%’ perfect ? To my knowledge it should he interpret like that…

d2rppa69 wrote: 2 hours ago

As the current ‘perfect’ tag, lots of player interprets as it can be 1 or more variables are perfect to be used the ‘perfect’ tag, he ce we get alot of discrepency on what ‘perfect’ tag means.

Which is totally fine, at least concerning the rules in this forum, as ShadowHeart stated in his first post. It is intended this way.

Perfect here means both perfect and almost perfect in order to keep the policing simpler for the moderators. Understandable, imo.

And almost perfect leaves room for many speculations, thus the discussion if two buttons (perfect / almost perfect) would not be the better solution.

d2rppa69 wrote: 16 hours ago

I think this kind of topics being brought up a few times in the past…

Anyhow, to make things less complicated, just add another tag calls “100% perfect”.m

Remove the current ‘perfect’ tag, in place of it, add ‘near perfect’ tag instead?

I hope to god, the potential seller better know when to use the ‘100% perfect’ tag means, if not, he/she should get the trading revoked temporarily…

Ever had a perfect day? Met the perfect girl or guy?

Was the day really perfect? Did you win $10 million in the lottery also? But that's not really perfect, because $100 million would be even better. Which is not perfect as well.

Ever heard of a baseball perfect game? Not actually perfect, truly perfect would be a strikeout on every batter. Even more perfect would be a 3 strike strikeout.

Most people understand and use perfect to be perfect within some realm of practicality and obtainability. For the literalists on this website, I hope you can understand this and one day also find pleasure in reasonably obtainable perfection.

Until then, you can take solace in your -55% light res/340%ED +3 attack rating Infinity ethereal

Scythe that also comes with 15% enhanced durability

varangium wrote: 1 hour ago

For the literalists on this website, I hope you can understand this and one day also find pleasure in reasonably obtainable perfection.

Let me briefly philosophise a bit:

I have no problem with being a "literalist". I will never find perfection, but that's no problem, since I don't seek it. I don't need "perfection" to be happy. I would always be unhappy if I truly sought it and failed to schieve it.
"Very good" is enough for me and it leaves room for improvement.
The journey is the goal. But the goal is never perfection.

Words like "perfection", "Eternity" "Infinity" (!), "immortality" and the like are just too big for us humans (They are an Enigma), therefore we always mean "almost X" when we use them. So maybe we just should not use these unhumanly precise words at all, since we don't understand them, at least not in a mundane context like trading.