Looting -- The official thread for discussing the loot system. Updated 18th March, 2013.

"

tpapp157 wrote:

It looks like we're all commenting the same things in circles.

The system seems fine for now. It's just really difficult to comment on such a timing based system without being able to experience the feel and flow of the game first hand.

Except we aren't all saying the same thing and we aren't all agreeing that the system is fine for now.

The main argument is still the same. The only reference to this being a player vs player game is the description of the world being "cut-throat", yet they have a separate league/arenas for pvp, hardcore, etc. So why is the draconic loot system being excused as "cut-throat" so deal with it?

Anyways, it still comes down to the same issue and this latency system changes nothing. The debate has and always will be about individual loot that is immune to ninja'ing. And one or even ten seconds doesn't make it better.

Why don't we get rid of loot drops entirely for FruitLord and whenever he wants a new item he can just ask GGG and they'll give it to him.

The devs have specifically ruled out the option for allocated loot. If it's really such a huge game-killer for you then maybe you should find a new game.

Seriously though. Allocated loot is far from a perfect system and many other people have brought up its flaws and shortcomings. I'm not saying that GGG's solution is perfect either but I think it's reasonable and with some tweaking and playtesting I think it can turn into a really good compromise.

This is the only thing I really don't agree with GGG. Just like some other members. So that, there must definetely be something wrong with this. Kills immersion, doesn't really make allocated-loot wanters happy and doesn't really make FFA loot wanters happy, brings an unnecessary mini-game that should be played at every moment of the game.

Eh, you don't have to play it. Not everyone you meet is going to play that minigame, and I doubt there's an unlimited inventory either - let them ninja everything and in ten minutes they have no room.
Or, of course, you can ditch them (maybe in the middle of a monster pack) for someone a little more friendly. I see it as an opportunity for players to choose between being nice or being greedy - and what game isn't about making choices?

That said, possible compromise on the compromise: allow manual allocation-time options in the party interface (from "no allocation time" to "infinite allocation time", with a few options in between).

"

Skivverus wrote:

Eh, you don't have to play it.

By that argument, no one truly has to play the game. Well, that's the obvious case, no one has to play the game, but the fact is a lot of people do want to play this game, and they all have differing tastes and play-styles.

"

Skivverus wrote:

Not everyone you meet is going to play that minigame, and I doubt there's an unlimited inventory either - let them ninja everything and in ten minutes they have no room.

You're right, there isn't an unlimited inventory. However, the fact is, this game is heavily based off of loot gathering. In fact, I would say that most of the game is based off of loot. The other part of the game is the actual fighting of enemies.

You'll never be able to get rid of the "loot it fast enough mini-game" because it will always be important. Also, because the dev's are pretty clear on their design goals. The only way to truly remove that mini-game is by playing solo-games.

"

Skivverus wrote:

Or, of course, you can ditch them (maybe in the middle of a monster pack) for someone a little more friendly. I see it as an opportunity for players to choose between being nice or being greedy - and what game isn't about making choices?

Most games are generally about choices. But in this case their's really only two choices - Play solo and avoid the loot-mini-game, or play with others and play the loot-mini-game.

The core of this game is that it's a multi-player game, that doesn't promote co-operative play. Essentially, player's are "left to their own devices" so to speak in terms of actually being co-operative.

I'm not trying to flame you, just responding to things I see as potential issues. Not that my arguments don't have their own issues.

"

tpapp157 wrote:

Why don't we get rid of loot drops entirely for FruitLord and whenever he wants a new item he can just ask GGG and they'll give it to him.

The devs have specifically ruled out the option for allocated loot. If it's really such a huge game-killer for you then maybe you should find a new game.

Seriously though. Allocated loot is far from a perfect system and many other people have brought up its flaws and shortcomings. I'm not saying that GGG's solution is perfect either but I think it's reasonable and with some tweaking and playtesting I think it can turn into a really good compromise.

I guess I missed the post where they actually ruled it out and said there's no way they would do it.

I'm not asking for awesome loot all the time here. All I'm asking for is loot that I earned. This isn't about a "challenge of the game" this about fighting griefers, which is not a fun aspect in any way unless you like to be on the other side snagging loot faster than your party members.

I'd love to hear the flaws of an allocated loot system. All I know is it removes a major flaw - griefing - which makes any flaws I can think of worth it. Removal of this major flaw means I can play anytime with anybody. Otherwise it is solo or with friends.

As other people have mentioned(and I believe I did in my first post), this is not a compromise. This is a mash-up of two loot systems that causes more problems and fixes almost none, just latency. And latency isn't even the major argument of the allocated-loot side of this issue, it is merely yet another reason why FFA allows for griefing.

I'm sorry if I upset you by speaking my mind about this issue. It really is a make or break kind of thing for myself and most of my friends. Does it mean we won't play? No, but it means we'll play a lot less since solo does get boring in a multiplayer game. We'll reduce our time played to only when we are all together and then that'll get old quick because we aren't progressing fast enough to hold interest.

I like that idea make people pay more attention on they surrounding. lol. Great idea..love the adrenaline rush.

the whole fun of killing monsters in a party is your running through areas slaughtering everything in your path and fighting your teammates for the loot.

your all acting like your not going to be playing with friends youve made. Join a guild, make some friends and party with them. if theres someone in your party that suits an item really well. give it to them and they will proberly do the same for you.

if your doing runs for loot then you have to fully expect everyone to be out for themselves because thats the whole point. If you dont like that sort of thing then dont join those runs. better yet, do runs with guild members and tell them what kind of item your hunting for.

"

p0rt wrote:

the whole fun of killing monsters in a party is your running through areas slaughtering everything in your path and fighting your teammates for the loot.

your all acting like your not going to be playing with friends youve made. Join a guild, make some friends and party with them. if theres someone in your party that suits an item really well. give it to them and they will proberly do the same for you.

if your doing runs for loot then you have to fully expect everyone to be out for themselves because thats the whole point. If you dont like that sort of thing then dont join those runs. better yet, do runs with guild members and tell them what kind of item your hunting for.

It should have stayed FFA then you suggest. I agree.

We're proposing the following system:
- All white text items are free-for-all.
- All magic/rare/unique/currency/gem items are allocated to a nearby player for a very small amount of time.
- All players can see the item, and a countdown of how much time remains until it's available to anyone is shown.
- The allocation time is intended to be very small (enough time to compensate for a little latency, reaction time and travel distance). We're thinking a base time of something in the order of 1 second when standing next to the item.
- The time would be increased by the time it takes for the character to run to the item. An item allocated to a ranged player might unallocate after two seconds, for example.
- It's important that the time is low enough that the player can only get the item if they are paying attention and make an effort to immediately grab it.
- The allocation times can be lower or non-existent in hardcore or cut-throat leagues.

Players who wanted an allocated looting system will hopefully be happy that this system mitigates item loss due to latency and travel distance.

Players who wanted a free-for-all looting system will hopefully be pleased - with this system they can take any item they want if the allocated player is not paying attention to the drops.

This is a concept based on feedback only. It's not locked in stone, but we like the direction it's going in.

What do you guys think about this suggestion? Please don't just post "allocated sucks", or "I won't play if it's free-for-all".

This is in response to those who are of the mindset that the loot componet of the game isn't up for debate/change. Highlighted in some parts to avoid confusion. Personally, I like the loot system as is.