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

"

viikinki wrote:

"

nil4t wrote:

"

There is an issue. Please stop being ignorant.

If you play with friends what is the issue?

Q: What are public groups for then?

A: To make those friends.

Q: Why do we have to go through FFA shit to make friends?

A: Because cutthroat vision.

Q: Why can't there be a checkbox 'people join this group because the game ensures there are no loot wars here'?

A: ?

I generally only public party when I wanna grind exp. That's what they are for to me.

Why farm gear in a FFA experince grinding session? If something drops and you get it great, if not who cares you were grinding for exp anyway.

a checkbox to enable a mode like that would be fine i think only if loot collected in such a mode was bound to your account so only you could use it. That would give everyone incentive to grow up if they wanted actually make currency like an adult.

I still have yet seen a valid counterargument to loot options.

"

Let the devs, who have the data, do the prioritizing.

The data? you mean the count of all the tears that have been shed in the forums?

"

viikinki wrote:

I think grouping with friends should be removed from the game since it's the easiest path and I don't want choices.

Only public groups, no invites, and don't show group names or group members in the public groups window so people can't coordinate to group with friends.

Such an easy option ruins the cutthroat vision of the game.

So easy yet there is a nearly 800 page thread filled with people who can not manage to do it.

"

ZshadeZ wrote:

The above is not a logical argument, it is your opinion. You believe it is not the solution, however not everyone agrees with you and that seems to upset you.

No. It doesn't upset me at all. Just tell me where I'm wrong and I'll gladly discuss why I said what I said or correct myself and admit I was wrong. Why should timers be gone? I've already written it a number of time. I really do not wish to do it again. The basis of my argument is that MANY people do not want timers, nor do I believe GGG. It was only in place to in hopes change the looting system to where it made everyone happy. I think it might have made it worse.

"

ZshadeZ wrote:

So have a group experience? You seem to be complaining that if you pause to talk others will carry on looting. That seems to say either that you're worried you'd be missing out on the loot while talking, or that you're upset that instead of paying attention to the group experience you desire others are focused on loot. There's nothing in the world stopping you from the second option I listed of gathering a group of like-minded friends and coming up with whatever loot-sharing or pause-to-chat play style you'd like without having to force a play style change on the rest of the game's inhabitants.

I do play with friends. I also play solo. I also play with randoms. You know what's bad about randoms? The loot system. It encourages poor sportsmanship, so here I am debating why the loot system could use a change. Hopefully, to a point where FFA players are happy, and the rest as well. I mean a true "compromise". Timers wasn't the solution everyone was hoping for. Tell me I'm wrong and why.

"

ZshadeZ wrote:

Here you're assuming I haven't kept up, decreeing that I misunderstand because I don't agree with you, and telling me to butt out of a thread on the public game forum. While you say you're only dismissive of points that are illogical or that you've refuted, you seem to have a poor grasp on logical debate. Just because you disagree with someone or you believe something doesn't make it a true and irrefutable point. You're actually the most dismissive person in the thread and mistake "I'm right, you're wrong" for logical debate.

I assumed that because you've not taken what a large majority of what I and others have said. Are you not assuming we are simply here because "qq" and "lack of friends" and "can't get my loot" like the rest of the people have been doing? Seemed that way to me. It was a personal assumption based on observation. I maybe was wrong?

"

ZshadeZ wrote:

Your group centered playing experience is something that already exists and can be easily accomplished. gather friends and play that way with them in group. if you can't find people who want to play the way you do, or pause and chat with you midrun... that isn't something to blame the loot system on.

It exists, but can be improved GREATLY. How is that a argument to keep the loot system unchanged? I'm content with how the system is, but I'm here to give GGG feedback on what the mistakes were. Are you going to deny every issue I have presented to GGG? I've listed I think around 8. You cannot say "just make friends" and say the loot system is perfect. That is what I'd call poor game design if so.

Can someone explain why "play public for exp/progress and play with friends or solo for loot" is the ideal setup? FFA loot is the cause for it, but I want to understand why it's a good thing, because from what I've seen alot of pro-FFA people consider this to be the best way for the game to be designed for.

"

ZshadeZ wrote:

You've stayed yourself that timers are not the answer. Quite vehemently. And now you say an increased timer option is logical? You seem to contradict yourself simply to disagree with others.

Sorry. I should've only quoted the part where he said "PS. "it would ruin the game" is not an argument." because that was the part I was agreeing to.

"

nil4t wrote:

"

Let the devs, who have the data, do the prioritizing.

The data? you mean the count of all the tears that have been shed in the forums?

You say tears. I say positive feedback. Feedback that the system is flawed. Occasionally you get people who say "GGG, fix your game." That does nothing to help GGG fix the issue. Likewise, you get people who also say "GGG, don't listen to those carebears/whiners" which I would also say doesn't help GGG one bit.

If you look at page 1 Chris states he would like to hear feedback and not just "i hate allocated" etc, etc.