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

"

TremorAcePV wrote:

- That would defeat the reason people claim to want another option besides FFA. It's to get all the loot. No other reason. If they get the amount of loot that would normally drop divided by the number of group members, it would basically not be different than playing FFA. The only difference really being that they are limited to what they see and can't pick up anything else besides it.

"

Ginfress wrote:

They have friends in the moderation team. End of the whole story.

"

cowkingmoo wrote:

"

Jackel6672 wrote:

Being closer to monsters means they are automatically closer to dying. Yes, there are anti ranged mobs. Doesn't change the fact that there are still more monsters per capita that are melee style or anti melee.

The naked guy would die. I would purposely let him die if he was in my group, and then kick him. I would party chat everyone to let him die. Your example is bad.

In these games melee is always at higher risk, and will always be. Ranged has to take risk to get loot, melee is already at risk when picking up loot.

FFA lives up to its name, its completely fair. If you don't grab the item, someone else will. I said before this is the best implantation of this system I have seen, and I still stand by it. Ranged isn't entirely gimped loot wise. They have survivability, and chances to pick stuff up in this game. I see nothing to change about it.

To the last paragraph, an option like that will remove FFA. Its not going to be implemented unless its somehow its own league. The two options cannot co-exist because the easier play style will always be chosen.

Except that you're once again forgetting the fact that melee builds tankier to compensate. I'm sorry, but just because you say that melee has it tougher doesn't make it instantly so. You also completely missed the point regarding the naked guy. The point was that someone shouldn't be rewarded for doing nothing in a group just because he's in a riskier situation. Kicking that person isn't a fix either. I addressed this several times previously but you completely ignored it. You also ignored everything else i wrote regarding how loot and melee being currently weak have nothing to do with one another.

FFA loot has nothing to do with being fair. You're contradicting yourself again. By it's very definition, cutthroat loot implies that it won't be fair. Once again, a glass cannon and a tank play together. The glass cannon can't go near mobs or he will die and so, the tank gets all the loot. There is no choice in the matter, nor does the tank deserve all the loot. That's not hard to understand. Also, you don't want to see instanced loot because you're scared that the majority of the players will use it and not FFA? Pretty sure you're being incredible selfish there.

"

Jackel6672 wrote:

Free For All. FFA is Free For All. Explain to me how everyone having the same ability to pick up loot is not fair.

"

Jackel6672 wrote:

Don't go into useless scenarios on ranged vs melee to do it either. There are advantages and disadvantages to both play styles that compensate for each other.

"

Jackel6672 wrote:

There are also ranged tanks. There is no set role, stop acting like there is.

"

Jackel6672 wrote:

I would also like to point out that ranged builds can take nearly every defensive node that melee can.

"

Jackel6672 wrote:

Who ever picks up the loot, obviously deserves it.

"

Jackel6672 wrote:

Also, way to not understand why I don't want to see options on this.

"

iamstryker

"

XCodes wrote:

Fairness is a secondary point. The primary point is that "loot tension" is bullshit, and that if this game really wants to be cut-throat then having asinine clickspam dictate who gets what loot is probably the most pathetic attempt imaginable.

Pure FFA loot is not Hardcore, Cut-Throat, or in any way useful to any game ever, and GGG looks like a bunch of morons for insisting so vigorously that it's somehow vital to the atmosphere of the game.

"

XCodes wrote:

This is the other reason why this thread has 672 pages, because people keep going over the same, old, meaningless arguments.

"

XCodes wrote:

Fairness is a secondary point. The primary point is that "loot tension" is bullshit, and that if this game really wants to be cut-throat then having asinine clickspam dictate who gets what loot is probably the most pathetic attempt imaginable.

Pure FFA loot is not Hardcore, Cut-Throat, or in any way useful to any game ever, and GGG looks like a bunch of morons for insisting so vigorously that it's somehow vital to the atmosphere of the game.

Both of you shut up about whether the looting is "fair" or not, because frankly it's obvious that you define the word differently. What's more, if anyone says that "loot system X is Fair," then frankly I'm going to call bullshit on you. A party that runs through an act will encounter hundreds, if not thousands, of randomly-generated currency items, magical items, rare items, and unique items, and in order for this system to be perfectly, absolutely fair, it will have to take into assign some kind of universal value to each of these items calculated based on their mods, sockets, and how high the roll is, and then weight the value of it towards each party member based on their spec, the specs of their alts, and so on and so fourth.

There are so many things about such a system that go against what PoE is trying to be that it's ridiculous. Therefore, NO LOOT SYSTEM IS FAIR, GET OVER IT! The only reason to want to have one loot system over another is because it determines how you want your party to act, and will work as an agreement between party members to either have their clusterclickspamfuck, to act like semi-resonable people and kill the things trying to kill you before getting distracted by shiny things, not after, or, best of all, to actually kill each other over item drops instead of playing this ridiculous game of "whoever picks it up first gets to keep it!" What kind of cutthroat badass does stupid shit like that!?