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

"

thepmrc wrote:

try posing a reasonable question and you might get your answer.

Here is one, what do FFA supporters have to lose with loot options? (other than people to grief)

My point exactly. I asked this precise question a couple of pages back, and didn't get an answer.
I see this as just an option, nothing obligatory for everyone. Why the rabid opposition from some posters?

"

derbefrier wrote:

You guys just see someone pick up an item that was marked as yours and scream like a bunch of girls. I'm no pro player and I miss a lot of loot but drop rates suck playing by yourself so even if you get the occasional drop stolen you still come out on top. just play the game instead of crying and you will see I am right.

The thing is that those players You team up and share with, You probably know, and know their needs. In public games You don't know what some other guy's (or girl's, for that matter) needs are. That is the difference.

"

thepmrc wrote:

Here is one, what do FFA supporters have to lose with loot options? (other than people to grief)

We lose fairness. This game is competitive for us (Say FFA isn't competitive and that's an opinion, it is for us).

If we are trying to get onto a ladder or "be better" than other people, how is it fair if they don't have to face the same challenges we do? Simple answer is that it's not.

Separation by leagues would be acceptable. The same way HC and SC separate different death penalty choices. Anything on a lower level (i.e. by party or instance) is not because then the players who choose one option mix with players who choose another. Which isn't fair.

The problem with adding new leagues is that it is harder on server resources and further splits the player base. Neither of which are good things.

Edit: The interesting thing is that carebears who want stuff other than FFA can already separate themselves from the rest of the players by going solo or forming private groups.

Forming private groups is something you do. It's requires effort. It makes the game somewhat easier as well but all players can do it. That's fair. Options requires no effort and isn't much of a choice. Solo is relatively harder (particularly for some bosses).

Both of which is fair.

"

thepmrc wrote:

Here is one, what do FFA supporters have to lose with loot options? (other than people to grief)

The real issue for me isn't a loot option. The issue here for me is you people are trying to make the game easier and more casual. If GGG gives into this request, it's making the game easier/more casual. Crybabies will realize they can cry about anything and get their way. After the loot option gets added, you guys will find something else that presents a challenge, and cry till it's not longer a challenge. Within a year, this game will have 0 challenge, and be a click to win child's game. I know you guys can't see it, but I have seen other games fall into this same pit.

"

derbefrier wrote:

Your not getting an answer becasue the entire premise of the question is faulty. Only stupid kids label others for retards for something like that and no one cares what stupid kids think. I farm in a group we share the loot we think someone might benefit from(sometimes). We pick up what we can and that's it. I also farm solo from time to time. I generally get more and better drops in a group despite the fact I don't always get an item that's tagged for me. In my opinion its actually stupid thinking you'll get more drops farming solo. It really boils down to you being selfish. even if its a public game I always come out with more useful loot than I do solo. You guys just see someone pick up an item that was marked as yours and scream like a bunch of girls. I'm no pro player and I miss a lot of loot but drop rates suck playing by yourself so even if you get the occasional drop stolen you still come out on top. just play the game instead of crying and you will see I am right.

Only idiots would label others as stupid kids for labeling others as retards!
Joking aside, you just don't agree with him. I still want to know why he, and many others here, seems to think that the game should be designed so that farming items in public games is a bad idea.

"

TremorAcePV wrote:

"

thepmrc wrote:

Here is one, what do FFA supporters have to lose with loot options? (other than people to grief)

We lose fairness. This game is competitive for us (Say FFA isn't competitive and that's an opinion, it is for us).

If we are trying to get onto a ladder or "be better" than other people, how is it fair if they don't have to face the same challenges we do? Simple answer is that it's not.

Separation by leagues would be acceptable. The same way HC and SC separate different death penalty choices. Anything on a lower level (i.e. by party or instance) is not because then the players who choose one option mix with players who choose another. Which isn't fair.

The problem with adding new leagues is that it is harder on server resources and further splits the player base. Neither of which are good things.

I'll be blunt. How? This is something I've been trying to understand. How do you lose fairness?

Sure player A is guaranteed his 5 drops from the kill. But who's to say they're going to be useful in any way? Plus he has zero option to grab something that dropped that could benefit him, unless it was assigned to him. If anything I see player A as the one who should be annoyed if he's trying to play competitively.

I want to understand why you think this way. I'm genuinely curious.

"

oranged wrote:

"

thepmrc wrote:

Here is one, what do FFA supporters have to lose with loot options? (other than people to grief)

The real issue for me isn't a loot option. The issue here for me is you people are trying to make the game easier and more casual. If GGG gives into this request, it's making the game easier/more casual. Crybabies will realize they can cry about anything and get their way. After the loot option gets added, you guys will find something else that presents a challenge, and cry till it's not longer a challenge. Within a year, this game will have 0 challenge, and be a click to win child's game. I know you guys can't see it, but I have seen other games fall into this same pit.

Hello slippery slope. How ya doing. This honestly just comes down to trusting the devs to know where the line is. I think they know where it is in regards to difficulty and indeed feel it needs to scale up better for parties. I love this game. Almost my only issue with it is the loot system. I don't play public games because of it, and I personally feel that's a problem that you have a section of the player base that is afraid (or similar) to play with the rest. Maybe you don't think that, which is fine, but when we've had plenty of great ideas and ways to balance adding these options in this thread and others. I don't see why they can't figure out a way to make it work and work well, if they want to.

"

TremorAcePV wrote:

"

thepmrc wrote:

Here is one, what do FFA supporters have to lose with loot options? (other than people to grief)

We lose fairness. This game is competitive for us (Say FFA isn't competitive and that's an opinion, it is for us).

If we are trying to get onto a ladder or "be better" than other people, how is it fair if they don't have to face the same challenges we do? Simple answer is that it's not.

Separation by leagues would be acceptable. The same way HC and SC separate different death penalty choices. Anything on a lower level (i.e. by party or instance) is not because then the players who choose one option mix with players who choose another. Which isn't fair.

The problem with adding new leagues is that it is harder on server resources and further splits the player base. Neither of which are good things.

Sorry to say this, but the public game race to the loot is just a minor aspect of the whole ranking race. PoE is a game big and difficult enough for it to be that way. There is no way that implementing a perm allocation option would affect the ranking of the really good players. Just more people would find openings into the low-mid range, at the most. And yes, I think definitely more people would be encouraged to play.

"

Kalriostraz wrote:

I'll be blunt. How? This is something I've been trying to understand. How do you lose fairness?

Sure player A is guaranteed his 5 drops from the kill. But who's to say they're going to be useful in any way? Plus he has zero option to grab something that dropped that could benefit him, unless it was assigned to him. If anything I see player A as the one who should be annoyed if he's trying to play competitively.

I want to understand why you think this way. I'm genuinely curious.

Player A doesn't have to go through randomness to decide what he gets as much as Player B (me) would.

Don't get me wrong, they still have to deal with RNG in regards to what actually drops, but they don't have the randomness of public games to say "Oh, he took that item that I could've used and won't give it to me." They don't have to deal with other players.

Basically, pure FFA with public games means you can either win or lose very big. Pure instanced is a straight "You get this." and that's it. That's the key difference between them, for me, and what changes the overall "fairness".

It adds another level of randomness which can make the game harder or easier. Easier in that I could find lots of stuff that's good for me and players who share what I need with me (or I them). It makes it harder by allowing players to take everything and not give you what you need.

That changes the difficulty. Either leave it up to luck, or make it skill based. Instanced does neither and that makes it unfair because it is "less random" than FFA. You can control the randomness (luck) of FFA by making private games, but that takes work/effort (skill).

"

Singingdog1110 wrote:

Sorry to say this, but the public game race to the loot is just a minor aspect of the whole ranking race. PoE is a game big and difficult enough for it to be that way. There is no way that implementing a perm allocation option would affect the ranking of the really good players. Just more people would find openings into the low-mid range, at the most. And yes, I think definitely more people would be encouraged to play.

Doesn't matter. It's an aspect. Honestly, the game's content isn't difficult. It's the added elements of randomness that make it difficult. And difficulty, for what some would call "hardcore" players, is what makes it fun, to an extent.

Overall though, I don't think the game needs to change, beyond bugs and adding content, as is.

I love this game as is, and I think it will thrive whether it keeps the current loot system or changes it to something more carebear friendly. It doesn't really matter. I just know I will enjoy it less if it happens. I won't leave, but I will enjoy it less.