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

"

Vooodu wrote:

I kill monster all by myself. Behind the group. A Unique wand drops with some other players name on it. They ARCHER tries to run over to it and get it but my WITCH got it.

My witch killed it.. My witch waited and got the drop after the stupid timer expired. My witch now has a great wand to use. And yet the archer had to RAGE on about getting ninja'd even tho he didn't even attack the monster.

Another issue with the group loot system. Hopefully GGG will be able to craft a solution to this issue WHEN they change the current system

"

Aixius wrote:

All this talk of needing "facts" and "evidence" to somehow prove that one loot option is better than another is laughable. The only thing that actually matters is how GGG wants their game to play. For me, they've developed the exact kind of game I want to play - loot system and all - and it's how I think games like this should play.

What you apparently call lazy, sloppy, dated design is what I call good game design - and what GGG would call their vision for their game. I hope they stick to that vision!

if laughable is the way that arguments work....then i am sure i do not want to live where you live..

in fact it is the CORE of a good argument
provide facts and evidences then other side provide their counter facts and their counter evidences and the discussion goes on...you seriously havent' participate in civilized arguments do you ?

so imply that with the 2 systems

a) FFA = put loot on ground and lets players fight it
b) IL = work you variables, see how variables calibrate in X players parties with X amount of IIRQ/IIRR, forsee possible exploits by that etc etc etc

you say that the first is "good game design"....now seriously you believe that? and if you believe that give me a reason why Blizzard left it in the stone with the Diablo3 ?
if it was a perfect system i imagine the company that maximize the $$$ from their titles woulda put it in their game also...

and i am sure (cant' find the dev to quote) that a DEV sayed the magic word in this looting issue

" if it worths the time "

now you can translate it in whatever you want but it seems they didnt' knew if it was worth the extra development time for the change....

i believe this thread and the majority of the groups that have "No Ninjas,Ninjas = Kick etc" proved them that IT worths the time

"

moikpei wrote:

Interesting thread! So old though.
I agree with a couple of the concerns raised about the polling within the thread. Multiple Choice pretty much eliminates nuance.

I'd like to see an poll sent by email to all accounts holders to fill in a sort of MadLibs about different parts of the game, then the developers can just Tag Cloud the adjectives and get a sense of leaning positive or negative and why.

Agreed my poll is not the most scientific source of data.

I only created it after I got called out for facts when I *correctly* stated that the majority of players want to see the system changed.

GGG knows that the system has flaws and once they are able to deal with the desync issue they will tackle this. They have an excellent track record of listening to and using customer feedback to improve the game.

"

Crizaig wrote:

Looting has been an issue since closed beta and will continue to be an issue until a better system is implemented. GGG knows there is an issue with the loot system which is why they asked for feedback and said that the current system isn't set in stone. So there is most likely going to be another change coming to the loot system.

i bet on that, they seem to take serious feedback seriously and in this thread we have putted lot of it

"

McHuberts wrote:

"

Vooodu wrote:

PRO FFA LOOT players are not defending FFA loot.. They are defending a state of mind and concept.

Perfect! Have your own state of mind and concept by choosing the option FFA when starting a multiplayer. I will have my state of mind and concept by choosing non-FFA when starting a multiplayer instance. Why can't a game support both sides of the spectrum?............ooooooh, but wait...............FFA players need the non-FFA players to create their state of mind and concept. Without victims the whole concept isn't funny at all.

Ah, but you being a "victim" isn't part of the FFA state of mind that he's talking about. You might feel like a victim, and you might behave like a victim afterward, but that's all on you and your state of mind.

The game (and GGG) could support this 'other' state of mind, but would it still be the same game? I don't think it would, and to me that is a very bad thing.

"

shyftyx wrote:

If GGG really wished for the game to be "hardcore", they need to go all in. The moment they start making compromises (like giving loot timers) is the moment that they start sending mixed signals to their playerbase about what their expectations of the game are, and is one of the reason this thread has more pages than it should.

I don't entirely agree. I do agree that GGG needs to stop half-assing the "hardcore"-ness of this game. I don't agree that adding loot timers in Normal somehow makes this half-assed. Partying in Normal is not supposed to be competitive, otherwise they'd let me kill you all after a boss fight.

What GGG needs to do is to make the goddamn Cut-Throat league already, and make THAT game mode have FFA looting.

I'm not going to read all 500 pages of feedback, but here's my two cents:
• Loot should be on the ground the instant mobs die, for everyone to see.
• Loot should not be distributed until the current fight is over.
• Once the loot is distributed have the standard timer.
• More loot dropped by final monster = longer timer (mainly referring to bosses, who drop an entire screen full of loot and players need a slightly longer time to sort through and locate what is important, plus bosses generally occur at the end of a dungeon, where there is usually downtime anyway)


This solves some problems in my eyes while still keeping the pace of the gameplay:
• It encourages players to fight the battle Players who would sit there picking up loot while watching their team dies doesn't get any benefit as the loot wont be distributed until the point that the battle is over
• It would force players to prioritize what loot they want, as everyone can see what is on the ground and after the fight is over they will have to decide what is most important and more importantly, what they NEED
• It would not slow down the gameplay at all as the loot timer would still activate on last monster for the same amount of time as it would if everything was distributed at once.

"

Crizaig wrote:

Looting has been an issue since ..blah blah blaah.

Instanced loot should be the last thing GGG focuses on at the moment.

Just saying.

This maybe the one thing you cling on to each and every day as you flood this thread with mind numbing post about "retarded loot ninja whores's".

But im pretty sure, it doesn't matter as much as you think it does.

"

Vooodu wrote:

"

Crizaig wrote:

Looting has been an issue since ..blah blah blaah.

Instanced loot should be the last thing GGG focuses on at the moment.

Just saying.

you again failed

in all forums sections in all threads there is NO thread with more views/posts...even Dsync is not heared so much....

also when i open party window and search for parties i see

" NINJA FO "
" NINJAz OUT"

etc

if this ISNT' their top priority i am really suprissed how they pulled out this game...

Looting is the most discussed in both forums and ingame (FACT). If this isnt' their top priority..their problem..

"

killbilly wrote:

"

Vooodu wrote:

"

Crizaig wrote:

Looting has been an issue since ..blah blah blaah.

Instanced loot should be the last thing GGG focuses on at the moment.

Just saying.

you again failed

.

Maybe in your mind.



But reality speaks for itself right?


I see alot of things that could use work in this game. And loot would not be on the top of my list. And judging by the fact the OP was made in 2011, it kind of proves my point.