Looting -- The official thread for discussing the loot system. Updated 18th March, 2013.
soo get better connection :0 for online games ,(joke)
|
|
First post. Hope I'm not out of line here...
Loot should be free for all, but the players need some tools to help them police each other. How about an "Ebay style" feedback system for grouping. As members leave the group, everyone provides some form of feedback. The preference would be for something quick, but some situations might require a more detailed log. Perhaps a screen pops up offering a "quick grade", and a checkbox for "I want to leave more detailed feedback later". A "ninja looter" flag and/or other archetypes, could be useful here. When prospective group members appear, they can have their history checked on-the-spot. Ideally, each existing member of the group can check the history and vote to allow entry. At the very least, allowing any player to check any other players history means people can at least make decisions for themselves (they can leave the group if they don't like what they see). Ninja looters, and other poor players would end up with a terrible "record" and would find it really hard to get a group. The system could be abused, of course (people leaving negative feedback just because they are stupid), but I really think that the bad apples that want to be jerks are a very small (and lonely and unloved) minority. Consider allowing for feedback to "fade" from a character as well. This way, someone who made some mistakes early, is not punished forever (if they aren't deleted out of frustration for not being able to get a group). I have never seen a system in-game like this before, but if I thought of it, its probably not unique. ;) Its nice being "just a player". I can use words like "Stupid" and "Jerk" in reference to the player base. I'll bet the devs wish they could do that. ;) |
|
Ok, what about when a group wrongly votes a player with bad history. Then it would carry around. Also if its ffa loot then its all fair game. i don't think that a history is a good idea also i am pretty sure that most people don't want to read through abunch of comments when playing with someone. Who's to say someone won't be a dick and add they're a dick everytime they play with other people.
Even with the fading it will get abused and cause more headaches. Plain and simple play with people you've played before so you know it will be fair. Besides don't most people play with friends anyways? Besides if they jack your loot just punch them in real life problem solved. Yes good sir, I enjoy slaying mythical creatures.
|
|
Why would a group wrongly give a player bad history? I don't think this is possible, unless you chose a group of people who lean toward being jerky, for lack of a better word. If people lean this way, then they are likely to have bad feedback themselves and you join them at your own peril.
There are going to be jerks who abuse the system. I don't care what loot system is in play, someone is going to abuse it. We deal with it. We're just looking for better ways to deal with it in this thread. Clearly the idea I've presented is not perfect, nor do I think a perfect system exists. The jerky people suffer in this system too, since they are far more likely to get bad feedback than someone who happened to run across a lone jerk in a group. I do not know that "most people play with friends". I have grouped with "pubbies" more than I have "guildies", over all. Given how many groups of non-guilded folks I see grouped, versus guild groups, I think this might just be wrong. That is my perception though. I wonder if the game devs know these statistics? That could probably be extrapolated from log data... I hope I don't sound too confrontational. I appreciate your comments. This is the sort of dialog that should take place in a forum. ;) |
|
Well main rule i follow "if people have the opportunity they will be dicks"
I just think that will FFA loot you need to be careful with who you play with and have a good friend list. I wouldn't say a guild so much as a couple friends. Especially considering the fact that there will only be 4-8 people in a instance so smaller groups will be the norm. The system you talking about could be abused or even accidentally problematic. Say i accidentally click and pick up two items leaving none for the others, and i really like both items is that person to fault for keeping them. I say no because it allowed in the game rules. Giving players a way to ostracizes other players because they playing within the loot parameters seems a little unfair to them. Also this is coming from someone that always kept loot equal. I was the person that would revive you if you died in a boss fight right before all the loot dropped so it would be equal.(Dark Alliance 2). The good thing is that while the normal leagues have FFA loot plus allocation this should make it relatively more balanced. For hardcore leagues if you don't like permadeath and ninja looters than don't play in them or play by yourself lol. By the way i have no problem discussing this i am not saying you or i am 100% correct. I am giving the evidence i have to support my view. Actually its nice for someone to actually make an educated post once in awhile. Yes good sir, I enjoy slaying mythical creatures.
|
|
Nobody wants to get their loot stolen from them so just pick it up first? Heck while your at it take their look too.
Everyone wins that way :D and rangers should just not stand a mile away cos you definitely wont get loot that way. Also make sure you got good runspeed. (maybe have rangers start with a slightly faster runspeed?) If your not getting much loot, have a coffee or a V. | |
Zidjian makes a good point. Two players in a group may have very different expectations for what is allowable looting behavior. To penalize one or the other because of this seems arbitrary and fickle at best. Especially when both players are still playing within the rules of the game.
Forum Sheriff
|
|
I hear you guys. I guess maybe I'm being naive about the general "goodness" that exists in any MMO playerbase. I also feel like the vast majority of players understand the general looting rules. Because of their general goodness and common knowledge of the rules, they are rarely broken by only a few people that are either just being jerks, or maybe do not yet have a full understanding of the common looting rules.
Perhaps I am being naive on the subject of whether players are generally "good", or not. On the topic of other potential loot system candidates, and I know this has probably been mentioned before, I liked how in some games where when an item quality threshold was reached, the item was displayed on all group members screens, and users were allowed to decline the item if they didn't need it, mark that they would like it for greed, or if they could actually use it. This resulted in rolls occurring for needy players first. |
|
Maybe the way to figure out the best loot distribution system is by allowing players to choose it themselfes from several models pre-constructed? This can be done by voting or by host at an instance creation. You can find adepts of any loot system writing on the forum but this doesnt make the statistic.
This models should include: a) wild FFA b) timed random allocation c) timed biased allocation (i.e. rangers have more chance to be allocation target for dex-abusing items, etc.) Then come WoW models (and I think we should pay attention to the solutions introduced in the game, which amassed insane experience in the loot distribution): d) Need Before Greed without restrictions, so that you either trust the guys you play with or you can quickly identify if someone is a ninja and vote to kick him. [the person who gets the item is a winner of a random dice roll between needers or everybody if no needers voted] e) NBG with restrictions, such as marauder not able to need on Int items, or f) NBG with a 1)class penalty (it can be calculated on the base of his stats) 2) stacking or frequency-dependent penalty - the more times (or frequently) you vote for need the more penalty you get - so that you can save that almost winning roll hoping to get that particular item, leaving ninjas almost no chance. And few general concepts. I think that it is crucially important to remove ANY counter-cooperative factors from the combat itself since even a minor competition forcing players to be less effective at slicing trough dungeons will develop into a cancer inside the game experience*. However, the way to apply wild FFA while keeping this rule is to enable looting AFTER party exiting the combat. So clear mobs together, and then compete. Same applies for other systems. You can argue that this kills a lot of the cut-throat experience but, well, the cut-throat+co-op=game with a zero sum. * I refer to EVE-online, in which PvE is 99% solo-experience while the game positions itelf as the most interplayer interaction-oriented game. |
|
At the risk of dating myself, I really enjoyed the loot model that UO had.
Anyone could loot and loot was free-for-all, but if you weren't the one that killed it or were in the group that killed it you turned grey for a certain amount of time. In that time anyone could kill you and take everything. So you could go around ninja looting everything, but you best be darn sure you can make a quick and immediate escape or else you're going to get ganged up on and picked dry. It's kind of mob rule, but at the same time it makes for some interesting dynamics in play. |
|