Board Thread:Wiki discussions and announcements/@comment-3308937-20150122092301/@comment-24073465-20150124184631

In my opinion, I kinda agree with what Delarthian has said...that Cost efficiency may be good as a tooltip or trivial fact or so, but it doesn't seem major enough for being high up on the page or anything....

Also, the problem with cost efficiency is how difficult it becomes to quantize the value of some passives/actives...particularly when two items may have similar passives/actives, but different gold efficiencies due to different gold costs, it kinda makes it confusing...ex. before Executioner's calling got removed, it had a similar passive as Morellonomicon...to quantify this passive becomes difficult...

Another problem would be on items which generate more gold/5 like the support items or Avarice Blade....as they generate gold, they kinda pay off for themselves/pay towards their upgrades....given how few people go for direct top tier item, the amount of gold generated by the item can affect their equivalent efficiency as well as that towards that of their upgrades...

Finally, I also want to agree with the statement of Delarthian that item synergy itself can affect the gold efficiency of the item....For example, we might be able to calculate stand-alone gold efficiency of PD...but pack it with an IE and any crits due to it jump up in damage i.e. for the same cost, suddenly your damage went up; i.e. it's synergistic gold efficiency is much more than stand-alone...

I may be looking at it the wrong way, and everything I've said could be countered and/or disregarded if you want, but in the end I think gold efficiency shouldn't be given too much importance, because if you sit down to actually start calculating it, based on passives, synergy, etc, the efficiency itself changes like hell...