Crazzie said:CanadinaXegony said:I really don't understand someone who doesn't get....if a piece of armor drops for a particular class...and its an UPGRADE, it goes to the person that needs that upgrade, not some person in group that wants to sell it for plat or give to their alt. I have been on plenty of adventures, where I didn't expect anything..I went for the fun and cameraderie..and that's why when it comes down to two or three people who could actually use that piece ..then people roll on it. The other thing I find disgusting is those that NEED everything..when in fact they just want to sell it and to heck with the person who could have used it to upgrade. But some choose to be like that. Those very same people gain a rep they won't like either..over time. Play fair, play honest. Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.
CX, unfortunally the younger gen not in our age groups dont get it and loot as greed to sell. The newer gen felt that all loot random was needed, in order to gain cash.
I have played many different games at different times, to check them out. The same new system comes up all the time. I tried to organize looting rules ahead of time, and it pretty much was aborted by someone saying I greed always, we need cash too.
Unfortunally it is a system that needs to be designed by us. Or by the Devs forcing a looting system in like some games did.
Good discussion.
I remember being just as upset about the younger generation that would greed everything. To me, it just made sense. If it's an upgrade, it's NEED. If it goes to an alt, or sold for cash, it's GREED. I still think that way, but in a strange twist, I DO sort of see the other side.
Something drops, and it's an upgrade for you. You equip it, and unequip what was in that slot just prior. That unequipped item will now either go to an alt, or be sold for cash - which is exactly what you're saying should only be a GREED roll. So, by rolling on a needed item, you're essentially getting an upgrade AND the cash, or the new item for an alt, that someone else would have gotten as a greed roll.
Which, in a way, turns every roll into a greed roll.
So, I get it. I just don't like it. Understanding, however, goes a long way.
disposalist said:
It's one of those areas where no doubt some will want it the EQ way "just coz" but, good grief, this has to be a mechanic where there is no good reason to avoid some modern convenience.
Free-for-all, need/greed/pass, rarity filters, round-robin, nominated, auto-loot, AoE loot, class/race restriction filter, etc, etc, etc, even 'personalised' loot. Just give us all the options and leave it up to the group/raid leader.
Have the argument over loot rules when joining a group and then no tedious messing about and arguing from then on.
Agreed with the above.
--------------------------------------------------
On top of that, if we had an integrated DKP system built into the game, guild leaders would not have to go through a lot of tedious micro management.
Let's face it, most (if not all) upper end guilds use some sort of 3rd party DKP system. And it is a pain in the butt to manage.
There are those that do not like DKP systems in guilds and will be against this. Fact is, DKP will be used whether it is integrated into the game or not for most raiding guilds.
Having it integrated into the game would aleviate many things:
* The game could log/track who is eligable for loot (based on how long they have been in the guild... attendance totals... etc).
* The game could log/track who participated/showed up for a raid/event.
* The game could log/track how long they participated.
* The game could log/track all members accumulated DKP points.
* The game could log/track who looted what, when, and handle the calculations for spent DKP points.
* The game could have the ability to send SMS Text Messages to guild members (that choose to opt in) from the raid leader. "Raid cancelled tonight", "Raid will be delayed by an hour", etc. I cannot tell you how many times I rushed home to try and make a raid, only to find out it was cancelled, or moved.
* The game could also have the ability receive SMS Text Messages for attendance acknoweldgements. In other words, guild/raid leader could send out a 'Will you be availble to tonight at 8:00p to raid xxx? (Reply with "Yes")' gets sent out, anyone that replies in the next XX minutes with "Yes" gets counted. Reply with "Yes", could be configurable to "Confirmed" or whatever word the raid leaders chooses, as well as the time for response (configurable in number of minutes). Leadership would then have a tally of confirmed participants for the raid/event that night.
I am not saying that something like this needs to be in the game at launch. Rather, it would just be a nice, convenient thing to have built into the game for guild management to use instead of having to mess around with 3rd party tools, log parcers, etc.
Tralyan said:Good discussion.
I remember being just as upset about the younger generation that would greed everything. To me, it just made sense. If it's an upgrade, it's NEED. If it goes to an alt, or sold for cash, it's GREED. I still think that way, but in a strange twist, I DO sort of see the other side.
Something drops, and it's an upgrade for you. You equip it, and unequip what was in that slot just prior. That unequipped item will now either go to an alt, or be sold for cash - which is exactly what you're saying should only be a GREED roll. So, by rolling on a needed item, you're essentially getting an upgrade AND the cash, or the new item for an alt, that someone else would have gotten as a greed roll.
Which, in a way, turns every roll into a greed roll.
So, I get it. I just don't like it. Understanding, however, goes a long way.
This is a good response. My thought is this; a BP drops and there is only one person in the group who considers it a combat upgrade - and a small upgrade at that. He is awarded the item and uses it for a few days before another upgrade drops, at which point he turns around and sells the first item for its cash value. To me that player was awarded a large cash drop over his group members for free just because the items was a small, temporarly upgrade. What if another player in the group could have sold that item for its cash value and purchased a lasting, impactful upgrade with that profit? The root of this whole discussion stems from the value an item carries - in games like WoW the item only had value to the person who looted it, but in PRF the item has equal value to everyone because even after it is no longer a combat upgrade it still retains its cash value.
I do understand the NBG point of view and loved the WoW system when I played, I just don't think it would be a good fit for a sandbox style game world like PRF. In my opinion there should only be two loot modes: group leader only, and free for all. No artificial NBG (sorry NBG folks).
I agree with Disposalist in saying that players should have plenty of options. NBG/FFA/Round-Robin/Master Loot with various filters are all good options. Give players the tools and let group leaders figure it out. If an option has a practical use then it should exist ... even if it's for a niche situation.
Xbachs said:I do understand the NBG point of view and loved the WoW system when I played, I just don't think it would be a good fit for a sandbox style game world like PRF. In my opinion there should only be two loot modes: group leader only, and free for all. No artificial NBG (sorry NBG folks).
I'd at least hope they don't have NBG looting as an option but instead have a Want/Pass option when it comes to rare drops allowing everyone to roll or pass but blocking the potential for someone to ninja loot the item.
Doesn't matter what the loot system is. In PUGS, it is always NEED in a NBG system. You can't trust PUGS, if you try to trust PUGS, drama will inevitably happen. Best to avoid it all. PUGS = Need everything. If you want something, ask, see if the group agrees. Granted, this is largely why I don't group with anyone other than guild members but... This is how it inevitably turns out if you don't want drama.
Where I wish they would improve the loot system is in raids. Dealing with multiple groups.
Come back to live, thread!
I've posted my thoughts on ae/autolooting in other threads already, but I feel it's a good topic to bring up again after yesterday's stream. I am very happy with the progress that was shown in the stream, but one thing that still sticks out negatively (to me) is the antiquated looting process. From what I've seen, there has been no mention that they have decided for a final loot system yet, so I think it's still open for discussion.
After playing with various automated systems, seeing them click each mob to check for loot seems really backwards. There are many better ways to do this. I kind of like EQ's autoloot window for example. It has some points that could be improved of course:
- the window should never pop up automatically during combat, only when all encounter mobs are dead
- allow master looter to set rules for specific items (for example, everyone automatically greeds on valuable cash items like gems)
Sure there's more. I hope that we'll see at least some sort of better system for looting in the future.
In terms of coin i think there should be a split coin button that gives coin to anyone who owns a share of it from defeating npcs. High level players who are playing a lt can opt out of coin shares.
In terms of gear I'm all for the ninja approuch whereby players can see the gear picked up in the group.
All forms of personal gear or NGB are totally fake and unreal. They make the game feel wishy washy. Let players choose and create a group dynamic rather than dong it all for them.
While I do have my own preferences on how loot should work based off of my own history with MMOs, I think the most key thing anyone can do when teaming up is to make sure you know what the loot rules will be for the group you are going to join. I tend to believe in need before greed--and to be clear, i mean this in a sense that the grouop comes to a decission about who truly needs the piece of gear--but I am also aware that depending on the group in question (PUG vs guild or friends, for example) this is not always ideal or safe. If I go into a group knowing they are running FFA when I join, I'm not going to spend 45 min telling them why they are wrong. I'm going to roll on the key item(s) that come up and if I knoww someone needs the item and I want to give it to them (for example, if I'm the healer and an awesome chest for my bf's rogue ends up in my inventory) I will give it to them. I'm using someone I'm close to as the example here, but in general I personally believe that if an item can be used to (honestly, legitimately!) upgrade a member of the group right at the moment we get it, IDEALLY it should go to them. However, I also think--from what I understand--that the amount of major loot we are going to see is going to be very different from something like WoW's 'loot pinata' mentality.
Loot drama happens in one of three ways, in my experience:
(1) You were not aware of the loot rules when you joined the group and feel cheated when they are relayed after something has hit the floor for everyone to check out.
(2) You / someone agreed to join a group, was told the rules, and somehow ends up bitter over the results. (eg. gear for my cleric drops, I know it's an FFA group, but the mage who wins does not share my philosophy about group advancement and decides to sell it. Again--purely eg. As long as I know rules up front I'm low drama about this stuff.)
(3) Someone 'changes' the rules out of nowhere --a party member ninja loots or throws a tantrum or tries to pressure other players into giving them something, causing drama.
Although I dislike drama, I am among those who would rather avoid personal loot--at least on key items. I think groups should need to communicate and sort those out. As far as gold and smaller stuff, the less random bodies I have to click, the happier I will be. I have limited use of my right hand and can generally either be using the keyboard or the mouse, not both at once. I don't like to feel that I am slowing my party down switching over to click a corpse every 5 seconds. But that's a personal gripe for personal, medical reasons and falls somewhat outside the core topic here.
Rogue said:Doesn't matter what the loot system is. In PUGS, it is always NEED in a NBG system. You can't trust PUGS, if you try to trust PUGS, drama will inevitably happen. Best to avoid it all. PUGS = Need everything. If you want something, ask, see if the group agrees. Granted, this is largely why I don't group with anyone other than guild members but... This is how it inevitably turns out if you don't want drama.
Where I wish they would improve the loot system is in raids. Dealing with multiple groups.
There needs to be a Looting dialog. Maybe make it optional, I suppose, but if it's good everyone would use it.
When you join a group, you can check the loot dialog to see what the settings are.
When an enemy falls and you're out of combat and someone clicks a corpse the dialog pops up with all the loot in range. Everything defaults greed. People tag the items with need and click OK. The group leader clicks OK when it's all set.
If someone tags an item Need and the group leader doesn't agree it can be 'discussed'... Depending on the group loot policy picked, it can be overridden by the leader or perhaps a vote system used.
With a nice dialog a lot of drama and confusion can be avoided.
Like many things that could be added, it doesn't have to remove any social interaction, it just smooths them and saves a lot of manual fiddly (mistake-riddled) effort.
Saw a video today about a loot system change in WoW's next expansion that got me thinking about this thread. Blizz is removing the master loot option from the game, so even full guild groups won't be able to use master loot. Raids are changing to personal loot. This is obviously not what we're talking about for Pantheon's loot system, but I think it's easier to make a point by looking at something that's gone off the deep end.
I agree with people in this thread that want a system closer to classic EQ. I think if you try to engineer a system that's fair for everyone, you'll end up taking away one social part of the game. I don't think there's a way to make a system that only allows people to be good to each other. If people have the option of being nice, they also have the option to be mean. So, how much of the loot system do we want to be controlled by the players, and how effectively can we police bad behavior as a community? My ideal system would be FFA/master loot and let the players weed out the bad apples.
chobo said:Saw a video today about a loot system change in WoW's next expansion that got me thinking about this thread. Blizz is removing the master loot option from the game, so even full guild groups won't be able to use master loot. Raids are changing to personal loot. This is obviously not what we're talking about for Pantheon's loot system, but I think it's easier to make a point by looking at something that's gone off the deep end.
I agree with people in this thread that want a system closer to classic EQ. I think if you try to engineer a system that's fair for everyone, you'll end up taking away one social part of the game. I don't think there's a way to make a system that only allows people to be good to each other. If people have the option of being nice, they also have the option to be mean. So, how much of the loot system do we want to be controlled by the players, and how effectively can we police bad behavior as a community? My ideal system would be FFA/master loot and let the players weed out the bad apples.
Lol. In real life we have systems for removing that kind of 'social part'. They are called laws, policing, courts and prisons. They aren't fun, but they are there for a good reason. I'd rather avoid that kind of RL interaction when playing games.
There is no judicial system for ninja looters. I don't recall anyone every being 'shunned' by the community for bad behaviour. Baddies in PUGs was just something you had to grit your teeth and put up with in past games.
There could always be an FFA or master loot option for those groups that agree they all love the excitement of never knowing when you might get betrayed and stolen from.
My looting system above pretty much only allows people to be 'good' to each other and doesn't remove the interaction, just eases any dispute resolution and facilitates the whole thing.
People can still have side deals and discussions over wanting to Need for an alt or whatever, but no one can actually initially do anything with loot that the group feels is unfair.
Disposalist, your suggestion looks pretty good. It leaves the ability for discussion yet prevents someone from going 'click, click click run / log' and that being the end of it. There is still the potential for squabbling over who gets what--love it or hate it--but someone wouldn't be able to just punk items / five finger discount a group and run away. As long as this was able to be set up for key items and I'm not going through it for every piece of vendor crap, it's not a bad idea.
disposalist said:When an enemy falls and you're out of combat and someone clicks a corpse the dialog pops up with all the loot in range. Everything defaults greed. People tag the items with need and click OK. The group leader clicks OK when it's all set.
If someone tags an item Need and the group leader doesn't agree it can be 'discussed'... Depending on the group loot policy picked, it can be overridden by the leader or perhaps a vote system used.
I like this system. It's essentially master looter that makes it easy to track who wants what. Doesn't remove any social aspects as far as I can see.
chobo said:disposalist said:When an enemy falls and you're out of combat and someone clicks a corpse the dialog pops up with all the loot in range. Everything defaults greed. People tag the items with need and click OK. The group leader clicks OK when it's all set.
If someone tags an item Need and the group leader doesn't agree it can be 'discussed'... Depending on the group loot policy picked, it can be overridden by the leader or perhaps a vote system used.
I like this system. It's essentially master looter that makes it easy to track who wants what. Doesn't remove any social aspects as far as I can see.
And like master looter, it is ripe for abuse. What is to stop the leader from deciding others don't need an item? Or in the case of voting, if 2-3 non-guilded friends are in a group and override the votes.
Want/Pass is most fair and can't be abused. The only NBG I'd consider going for personally would be one in which whomever "needs" the item has to give the equipped item the drop is replacing to the group for them to roll on THAT.
Iksar said:chobo said:disposalist said:When an enemy falls and you're out of combat and someone clicks a corpse the dialog pops up with all the loot in range. Everything defaults greed. People tag the items with need and click OK. The group leader clicks OK when it's all set.
If someone tags an item Need and the group leader doesn't agree it can be 'discussed'... Depending on the group loot policy picked, it can be overridden by the leader or perhaps a vote system used.
I like this system. It's essentially master looter that makes it easy to track who wants what. Doesn't remove any social aspects as far as I can see.
And like master looter, it is ripe for abuse. What is to stop the leader from deciding others don't need an item? Or in the case of voting, if 2-3 non-guilded friends are in a group and override the votes.
Want/Pass is most fair and can't be abused. The only NBG I'd consider going for personally would be one in which whomever "needs" the item has to give the equipped item the drop is replacing to the group for them to roll on THAT.
Free-for-all is 'fair'. You all have equal chance to run at the dead monster and click-click-click-loot. I think there's a more pleasant way of doing things somewhere between that and personal loot, though.
Want/Pass is only 'fair' if you're happy with items going to people who will just sell them when you really do need them. If you're going to go that way, then round robin in random order until everyone has one is the only fair way, and even then you'd have to hold back the items until all 6 of you have one, else the first person getting 'the good drop' from the camp can just leave the group.
In my voting system you'd have to have 4 people in a group willing to damage their reputation and being in some pre-arranged collusion. I'd be happier with that chance than just trusting completely to luck. Also, if you had 4 people in collusion agreeing that whoever gets it, they will give it to their guildmate, then is want/pass fair, even?
If you're going to look into that level of meanness, that guild could always send a member to that camp that Needs the items, but then gives them to the guild later to sell?
Greedy people will break the 'fairness' of any system, but that's no reason to not give people the tools to more easily be fair and, so, encourage it.
Riahuf22 said: I'd say need before greed with a twist, if you are using something or have something in your inventory that is better or equal to what is dropped the need feature is grayed out or opens the need option for everyone
The only problem with this is it's going to be really hard to say what an upgrade is for someone in this game. Situational gear is going to be a thing, so it might not be a stat upgrade, but it has a nice boost for cold acclimation that you need to survive in a different dungeon. I think they've also hinted at needing to keep a stock of different weapons. Like some boss that's weak to piercing damage (not sure about that. Just a guess).
I think trying to find a fair system will be nearly impossible because everyone has a different definition of fair. And what's fair can change based on why everyone is running the dungeon (is it for gear upgrades, situational gear, or grinding some mats). I think we should focus on things like what disposalist suggested where we give tools to groups to implement their opinion of fair instead of the game dictating it.
disposalist said:Want/Pass is only 'fair' if you're happy with items going to people who will just sell them when you really do need them. If you're going to go that way, then round robin in random order until everyone has one is the only fair way, and even then you'd have to hold back the items until all 6 of you have one, else the first person getting 'the good drop' from the camp can just leave the group.
Greedy people will break the 'fairness' of any system, but that's no reason to not give people the tools to more easily be fair and, so, encourage it.
General summary of my points on loot rules (last time in this thread, I promise):
NBG makes sense when items don't hold value for anyone but the person(s) who can equip the items, but when items are freely tradable & re-equippable by others (most items will not be no-drop or soulbound) then they have value for everyone and retain that value long after someone gets them and upgrades again down the line.
If you are in a PUG and spend 4 hours at a named camp and the rare spawn drops his rare item that is worth a high value in the market and it gets defaulted to the only person who can immediately equip it (even if it's only a minor upgrade), they just made a huge profit at the expense of the group. So they take the upgrade and get to sell whatever item was in the slot before and in not too long of a time are likely to replace the item they just got to make even more profit. The only difference between that and letting everyone roll if they want is that those who can't use the item sell it as soon as possible (rather than later on, and after fairly winning a roll against 5 others) to someone else who will use it and then buy something they can use from someone else.
It's a far better way for camps to work. Instead of having to rely on getting into the small handful of camps that drop items that you can use and are direct upgrades, you can join ANY camp and have a shot to at least get a different item you can either trade/sell to get the item from a camp you can't get into. This point is very important in an open world with camps/contested content where players might find themselves unable to get into specific camps for extended periods of time due to popularity (see the next point). It also discourages groups from edging out certain classes in order to better guarantee the drop going to a specific member.
It makes for a more bustling economy and gives options to players who cannot seem to get into group X for the drop they want. Some days all the drops of the item from a named mob might go to classes who can't use them so they end up on the market for those that can, increasing the number of both buyers and sellers participating in the economy.
It makes itemization a much easier task for the devs as well since they won't have to make sure there is something for each class (or at least each class role) at every named camp. Why would healers or tanks ever spend time at a camp that drops nothing they can use if it just gets auto passed to a different class/role?
The absolute fairest way (for PUGs) is that everyone gets an equal shot at valuable drops, aka a want/pass system. It can't be exploited or worked around unlike nearly every other method, certainly not nearly as much as NBG can as NBG encourages shady behavior in PUGs like un-equipping your better gear before joining a camp so you can claim need on a high value item to sell it off on an alt. You could bet your buns that people would be hiding the fact that they already had a FBSS in EQ to get more free money from a bunch of random people. I don't play games to gear out a bunch of random people and I don't believe most others do either as the world isn't full of altruists and neither are online games.
Which sounds more greedy/selfish? "I know all of us put in the time and effort to camp this mob but I can equip that armor now so it should be mine" or "We all put in the time and effort to camp this mob so let's all have a roll and see who wins" ?
I'm starting to think I'm just going to have to see whatever loot system we have in action during testing. If everyone is able to just do whichever loot system they want to use, then I think that's fine. I just persoanlly don't like a system that doesn't require any communication.
chobo said:I'm starting to think I'm just going to have to see whatever loot system we have in action during testing. If everyone is able to just do whichever loot system they want to use, then I think that's fine. .I just persoanlly don't like a system that doesn't require any communication
Yes, THAT!
I think personal loot would be best for anything non-amazing. For the good stuff have people self-flag as Need, Greed or Pass, then start a bidding war among those who chose Need (or Greed, if no one chose Need), kinda like the system in Blade & Soul. This may sound like a gold pharmer's/seller's dream, but money usually weighs something. so you can't carry a ton without making life difficult anyway. Upon saying that, however, it seems that strong characters will have the advantage.
EQ's system was always broken to me. People ninja-looted stuff at seven years every bit as much as they did that first year. It was what we had to deal with and it sucked. Self-policing? That's a pipe dream*. Shouting out to the zone/group/guild/whisper/GM that Soandso took your kill/loot/epic quest NPC/camp/whatever really didn't matter much. The message boards shamed quite a few bad seeds, but you know what? Almost no one reads the message boards, so Soandso carries on. Also, most names can be forgotten over time. Granted, it's not a huge community, but you try remembering 3000 names. No communication for looting? "Good," I say. Link it in chat if you want to talk about it. I've suffered through arguments over loot far more than I've ever gotten any good loot. Rift's system of loot may be a step too far, but it's better than many I've played with.
*Related but extra:
One solution for policing might be a system where we could have leaderboards of player-endorsed "Most Helpful:" classes and/or roles. "Best Tank" "Best CC" Best Necromancer" "Best Puller" "Best Scout" "Best Healer" "Most Knowledgeable" "Best Explorer" "Best Leader: Group" "Best Leader: Guild" "Most Dependable" "Most Generous," et cetera. People like to see their name in lights - let's not give a marquee to those who act shamefully. That may work better as a GM-only leaderboard with "Most Reported Player (not character)" "Most Exploitative Player" or "Biggest Chumps": Those would be the ones who argued that you should hate the game, not the player when a GM catches up with them.
Lodgedogg said: I prefer the original EQ looting ninjas happen then they get a bad rep and can't find groups anymore it weeds out the dirtbags in my opinion
Well said. I believe in a very organic and natural approach to moderation of in-game mechanics, as much as possible.
The more artificial restrictions and limitations you place on in-game systems, the more it takes players out of the world and makes them remember they're just playing a vidja game :P