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

Still morons with this one way or the other attitude and those with a superiority complex over thinking playing without respect of other increases the size of their penis.

"

Pinchyskree wrote:

Still morons with this one way or the other attitude and those with a superiority complex over thinking playing without respect of other increases the size of their penis.

Says the diamond supporter that has done nothing but complain about the loot system.

Why'd you spend so much money on support if you dont support it? EPeen much?

"

iamstryker wrote:

Absolutely nothing you have said about the silly "no ninja" discussion has PROVEN anything. You just spout off your opinion and pretend they are facts.

Got to go, I'll post later.

So, what you're saying is loot timer means allocated loot? And it if take any drop with with a timer im a ninja?

Because i say NO, and when i check the devs reasons behind loot timers im proved right. Which is indeed a FACT. Which is why i can use the word fact...lol

Now you can sit their thump your keyboard non stop with a million page essay about how im wrong and 'pretending' they are facts all you want. You can quote me to death and disect my posts all day long. You can claim im spouting opinions.

But, im just going by what the actual devs said about loot and keepin' it real.

See, im not making things up because i don't have too.

"

KorganBloodaxe wrote:

"

gonzaw wrote:

...

Best post in this thread so far!

Here's my view of your 4 suggestions:
1) I guess GGG still needs to work on that one. If I'm not mistaken they wanted something like this from the beginning, so I hope we eventually get something like this. Ultimately this should be folded into 2) though.
3) Would be nice though I think that would be a lot of work for GGG.
4) Isn't that one the same as 2) ?

My preference is 2) and here's why and how:
There are lots of different players and each one may prefer a different play styles. The party leader should have several independent options for maximum benefit.
What I'd like to see:
- A slider for how long items should stay allocated for a player (from 0 to unlimited)
- A checkbox to keep the name on the item even after the timer has expired
- A checkbox that makes items only visible for the player an item is allocated for. When the timer expires it's visible for everyone.

I think with these 3 simple options every player can find a settings that's right for him.
From the professional race group to the old Diablo 2 pros, and from the group of friends to the once-in-a-while public party participant.

The thing about 4 is that yes, in the "group party" it includes 2 and maybe 3 (or whatever it's decided to include in a "group" play)
However, people that want the cut-throat feeling and the like get the "normal" public party type, which is the one currently in as well.

This is the main problem I get, the definition of party
Some guys think it means a bunch of strangers just briefly helping each other kill monsters, but that's it. Other than that it's PvP, regarding loot, cooperation and the like.
I mean, as a party you can just go wherever you want, help other members kill monsters if you want, and if you want not; and then go sweep the loot any time you want, etc.

However, me and others may think of "party" as what it normally entails: A group of people working together.
In this definition, a party entails people cooperating with each other. It entails an organization, it entails order, it entails rules, it entails fairness between members and a structure.
In this definition, everybody in the party behaves as a single entity, that wants to benefit the party itself, while still being equal individually based on effort. Basically a little tribe or community.
With the current system, this falls to crumbles. There is very little coordination and communication; and not only that, there is no "structure" nor "order".
Like some people say, someone can just stay back, don't do shit while others put all the effort into killing monsters, and then sweep all the loot for themselves once timers expire.
Or a player maybe can get a lot more "special" (with timers) loot than someone, and there is no consequences nor "justice" at all.
Someone may party and work hard and get 0 loot, while someone may not do shit and get all the loot, and everything in between.
With this 2nd definition of party, this isn't fair, and again, basically breaks the definition.

I'm catering towards improving the system so the 2nd definition holds true.


"Okay" some people may say, "Why should there be a 2nd definition of party at all?"
Like some people said, parties are all about cut-throat and the like, and they want it to continue being so.

But yes, this is not catering to all players out there.
FSome players, when grouping with others, want the 2nd definition of party instead of the 1st one. They want to play "safe", but in a social environment. They want to have fun playing with others, while feeling they aren't "violated" or anything.
In this game they have NO CHOICE but to use the 1st one, and when they do so they become greatly frustrated.
For them it's basically even worse than if there was no party mechanic at all


My ultimate solution would be something like this:

Create 2 types of parties.
Cut-throat party: Same as now. Fully FFA loot, however include suggestion (1). Make it possible for players to actually fight, in one way or another (maybe not "fight to the death" duels, because it's HC) for loot they want. Maybe include the "allow players to fight each other" to include a more "fair" scenario, that's still cut-throat.
Group party: Let the party leader choose if he wants suggestion (2) or suggestion (3). Basically make parties an organization that can be customized and have specific structures (regarding loot system) and the like
Make it so the party leader can choose between using FFA loot and balancing things himself, or using player-loot for everybody, or using the "Party Inventory" one (for a more social and "real" aspect of the game)

Basically, include everything, and everybody is happy
People that advocate the FFA will only choose Cut-throat.
Why? Well Voodou said it himself "I don't want some rules in a public party". They will never join the "Group" parties because it decreases the pace of the game for them and it's too complicated and they like the cut-throat feeling
Other players that have trouble with the current system, will join the "Group party" instead. Here there will be so much customization for parties they can choose whatever it pleases them. Either join an FFA party with specific rules for getting loot (if you don't fulfill it you get kicked out or something else happens to you); they can go into player-based loot parties to play "safe", or into the "Party Inventory" one for some more role-playing, etc.

Unless these are implemented badly, so that there can be an exploit which can break the game, then everybody is happy, and nothing changes in the core of the game.
That's what I think now.

Alternatively, doing any of the other suggestions helps, as long as it's done correctly

Thoughts?

"

Vooodu wrote:

"

iamstryker wrote:

Absolutely nothing you have said about the silly "no ninja" discussion has PROVEN anything. You just spout off your opinion and pretend they are facts.

Got to go, I'll post later.

So, what you're saying is loot timer means allocated loot? And it if take any drop with with a timer im a ninja?

Because i say NO, and when i check the devs reasons behind loot timers im proved right. Which is indeed a FACT. Which is why i can use the word fact...lol

Now you can sit their thump your keyboard non stop with a million page essay about how im wrong and 'pretending' they are facts all you want. You can quote me to death and disect my posts all day long. You can claim im spouting opinions.

But, im just going by what the actual devs said about loot and keepin' it real.

See, im not making things up because i don't have too.

Some players think they are entitled to some special loot.
Considering timers, it's RNG.
Players feel that, all things equal, everybody is entitled to the same ammount of "special" loot. Thus, all things being equal, they think everybody should be entitled to their "timed" loot
Why? Again, if it's uniformly distributed, if everybody is entitled to their allocated loot, everybody gets a fair share of the loot.
If someone "ninja"'s you, then they make it so you get less "deserved" loot than average, thus you feel like someone "stole" from you. Meanwhile, if that guy collects all loot allocated to him, he'll have a net gain in terms of "special" loot.
Was he entitled to it? Some players feel they aren't.

Of course, if you are the one sitting back doing nothing, and someone that worked very hard to kill a boss or something "steals" your loot, then you should feel less entitled to said loot and not complain that much.
However, that doesn't happen normally. PLayers complain about the opposite: them doing the hard work and getting less "entitled" loot than someone not doing shit

Again, it's not "allocated loot->It's your entitled loot", it's a psychological connection done based on what one thinks is fair and about what loot one thinks one deserves to get.
Using the "timed" loot is the easiest way, considering it's complete RNG, and thus, fair to everybody.


Taking this into account, then yes, there are "ninjas" regarding "entitled" loot.

Again, please answer the previous questions.

These are the hard, cold facts: There are A LOT OF PEOPLE that don't like the current loot system, enough to destroy their enjoyment of the game, and maybe even quit, or straight up just making them have much less fun

Yes, that's a fact. I mean, there are so "loot system sucks!" threads that mods have to close all of them and HAD TO STICKY a thread telling everybody to stop posting those.


Now, again, this is the question: Do you care about solving this problem?

"

Pinchyskree wrote:

Still morons with this one way or the other attitude and those with a superiority complex over thinking playing without respect of other increases the size of their penis.

This adds as much to the civility of this thread as some of the worst mudslingers here. Being a diamond supporter and showing off that tag while making comments about penis size and a superiority complex just looks bad – seriously, look in the mirror.

The only reason I'm personally against choices is the very real possibility of everyone choosing one game mode (instanced loot) and NOT having any actual choice. (because there would be NO ffa games) Whereas right now you can at least have declared rules, people can agree to follow... Maybe GGG can find a way to balance it out, I do not know. Does that make me a moron?

/edited (added)

"

EgypZee wrote:

The only reason I'm personally against choices is the very real possibility of everyone choosing one game mode and NOT having any actual choice. Whereas right now you can at least have declared rules, people can agree to follow...

This statement of yours does not make any sense at all.

"

mobutu wrote:

"

EgypZee wrote:

The only reason I'm personally against choices is the very real possibility of everyone choosing one game mode and NOT having any actual choice. Whereas right now you can at least have declared rules, people can agree to follow...

This statement of yours does not make any sense at all.

I'm refering to hard coded settings that the game creator can choose. What choice does someone have if there are 5 games listed and they are all "instantced loot" games?

Make the 6th game with ffa toggled?
Thats obviously a choice.

As oppose to the current system:
What choice does someone have if there are 5 games listed and they are all "ffa loot" games?
He can't make a 6th game with instanced toggled because atm there is no choice.